Re: A clarification for my interpretation of GFDL
Anton Zinoviev <anton@lml.bas.bg> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 08:11:11AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> Firstly, if my needs require me to rtemove the secondary
>> sections, and invariant sections, I should be allowed to do so
>
> Ok. However so far, nobody could give a resonable example of needs
> that can require you to remove the secodary sections.
No, several people have. You just don't want to accept these, and
therefore each time one example is mentioned, you start arguing about
small details and only concede the others are right step by step, until
nobody knows whether you have been proven wrong by the example or until
nobody cares enough to further discuss your statements.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX)
Reply to: