Re: ocaml, QPL and the DFSG, new summary
On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 02:18:19PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-07-23 11:59:33 +0100 Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >[...] ask himself if he honestly
> >believes to have the legal background enough to make claim.
> I assume that this is not a suggestion that only replies of certified
> lawyers have value, else your contribution has no value either. As
> such, I think it's poor form to post such confusing wording. In
> general, I feel your entire preamble has too much venom, suspicion and
> insult for readers. Consensus-building is unlikely while you abuse all
> readers before they do anything to you.
Well, sorry, but the whole previous thread had much of it to start with, and i
don't want this tntative of resolution of this issue polluted with the
bullshit that was apparent in the rest of those threads.
Also, you can read the above as a exhaurtion to some humbleness before making
assertion about what a judge will or will not do.