Re: GR proposal: GFDL with no Invariant Sections is free

[Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>]

Manoj wrote:
>         So, I am seeking arguments and guidance from the developer
>  body whether issue 1 can, and should, be decidable by a general
>  resolution, or whether the freeness of the GFDL licensed works
>  without invariant clauses is incontrovertibly non-free, as the
>  license is currently written.

Whether the GFDL conflicts with the DFSG is not a matter of opinion.
It either conflicts or it doesn't.  The question is really who decides
whether it conflicts.  I would say that it depends on what is being
asked.  If the question is whether something can be uploaded to main,
then it is the ftp-masters decision.  If it is the question of what
the release criteria are for the next release, then it is the RM's
decision.  Similarly, if it is the question of whether a GR requires a
supermajority, then it is up to the secretary [1].

They have to make a decision, so they do not have the luxury of
waiting until something is completely clear in one direction or
another.  So what standard should they use?  I would argue that there
is always a more restrained option A (reject the package, require a
supermajority) and a less restrained option B.  Given that the actions
of the delegates should be more restrained (so they may inherently
favor option A), there are two standards that come to mind for B to
prevail

  1) Preponderance of evidence: Option B more likely true than option
     A other, but neither need be clear cut.  Options A and B are
     symmetric.

  2) Beyond a reasonable doubt: No reasonable person who has studied
     the issue would say that A is true.

Which standard to use is not specified in the constitution.

Cheers,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu


[1] Appendix A3.3.4 of the constitution says

  In cases of doubt the Project Secretary shall decide on matters of
  procedure.