[OSM-legal-talk] CT clarification: third-party sources

[Anthony]

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
> Grant Slater <openstreetmap at ...> writes:
>
>>If at some mythical future date the OSMF decided to propose a new
>>license; they would have to be damn sure at being able to convince at
>>least 67% of us that this new proposed license was "free and open" on
>>our terms.
>
> Well, 67% of 'active contributors' however defined.  The definition of active
> contributor can probably be altered by the simple expedient of blocking
> contributions from those who don't click 'agree' to any proposed new policy.
>
> Of course the current OSMF management act in good faith and would never
> do such a thing, but in theory it is possible.

Would never do such a thing?

OSMF *plan* to stop allowing contributions from those who don't click
agree to the next CT.  What makes you think they wouldn't stop
allowing contributions from those who don't click agree to the one
after that?