Re: one of the many reasons why removing non-free is a dumb idea

[John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 03:38:13PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> If I understand you correctly [and there's a very good chance that I do
> not understand you correctly], you are advocating ideas from a proposal
> you don't wish to advocate?
> 
> Or maybe you are in the process of proposing something else, but that's
> not ready yet, so instead we're talking about this other proposal?
> 
> Or maybe ...
> 
> I really do not understand what it is you're trying to do, nor why.

I'm just trying to say why, in my opinion, non-free should go.

Many of the same reasons motivated the 2000 proposal.  The reasons also
apply to the proposals now before us, in my opinion; the authors of
those proposals obviously may disagree and must speak for themselves.

I am not presently drafting any new proposal, nor do I have any plans to
propose anything.

I just thought it would be handy when you asked me to write up something
about my reasons, to just point you to something I already wrote,
thinking it may be relevant to today's discussion :-)

-- John