Re: Candidate social contract amendments (part 1: editorial) (3rd draft)
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 06:13:49PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> Note: as you've currently proposed this, it's not clear whether you
> intended to offer it as an alternative to your other proposal or not.
>
> There are a few things in there that I like. If you are willing to
> propose a version which combines this with your other proposal, I'll be
> happy to update mine, yet again, with the parts I like.
The whole point of this proposal was to vote on the non-ideology stuff
(i.e. what Andrew just presented, note the 'part 1: editorial' in the
subject) apart from the big flamage question (the non-free stuff). Aj
argued heavily for this splitup when Branden first presented his
updates, and Andrew took up the ball when Branden was busy.
So his other proposal is still valid and there's no point in recombining
the two.
That's how I remember the discussions, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Michael
Reply to: