[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposed GR: State exception for security bugs in Social Contract clause 3

Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:

> While I stand by my GR in principle, I agree with those who have said
> that it is not worth spending time on something like this unless it's
> going to pass without opposition. Since this GR /has/ turned out to be
> quite controversial, I hereby withdraw it.

I support your interest in bringing the topic for discussion; I agree
that the unfortunate inference you described can be reasonably read in
the text of SC §3.

While I agree with your decision to withdraw the GR, for reasons others
have expressed well, the discussion was short and useful. We need not
only GRs that pass without opposition; we can learn from even
controversial GR proposals, though as you point out they might quickly
become damaging, also.

So, thank you for starting this, and for finishing it gracefully.

Also: welcome to the project!

 \       “You can never entirely stop being what you once were. That's |
  `\   why it's important to be the right person today, and not put it |
_o__)                                 off until tomorrow.” —Larry Wall |
Ben Finney

Reply to: