Re: Summary? (Or: my vote is for sale!)
On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 04:15:10PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> The "Editorial amendments to SC" GR was not a null operation; it quite
> clearly changed the social contract to make the DFSG apply to all
> works distributed in main. This was rather laboriously discussed on
> -vote at the time, with AJ (then the RM) heavily involved.[1] It was a
> large number of people's understanding that this was what the SC
> originally intended, but this view was not universally held, which was
> why the GR was necessary.
For the "editorial changes" GR, I didn't have the time to follow the
entire flamewar and voted in belief that the changes were indeed
editorial because I believed in the text in the CfV. I was
horror-stricken after the GR passed and people said what we had
indeed voted for.
I have a sincere distrust for CfVs since then since I feel badly misled.
Greetings
Marc
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
Reply to: