Re: Anton's amendment
"Wesley J. Landaker" <wjl@icecavern.net> writes:
> Thomas, I don't even know what your asking for here. It only makes sense to
> give a big long detailed interpretation of the points of the DFSG where it
> FAILS.
We have people saying that there is an interpretation of the DFSG
under which it passes. I'm asking for that interpretation to be
spelled out.
This is not the case of asking whether a license passes. Remember,
that's not what the discussion is about. The discussion is not about
whether the amendment should succeed or not. The discussion is about
whether the amendment works a modification of the DFSG.
Manoj, the Project Secretary, has said that, in his opinion, it does.
He has also expressed is openness to being convinced to the contrary.
Those who wish to convince him need to do more than just declare "it's
all a matter of interpretation" and then point to the controversy to
demonstrate that it's all just a matter of interpretation. They need
to actually give the interpretation they would like Manoj to take into
account.
Thomas
Reply to: