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

[Robert Kaiser]

Anthony schrieb:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Francis Davey<fjmd1a at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> On 12 December 2010 14:08, Robert Kaiser<kairo at kairo.at>  wrote:
>>>
>>> If "67%" is not clear in legalese, then legalese is stupid, IMHO. Let's
>>> abolish all legal rules and make contributing fun instead, then.
>>>
>>
>> There's no such thing as "legalese" as I've said before. The CT's
>> don't say "67%" they say "2/3", which is completely clear. The phrase
>> "at least a 2/3 majority vote" has a pretty clear and unambiguous
>> meaning.
>
> It's not clear what the denominator is supposed to be.

2/3 of me are still trying to understand you, the rest are yelling "he's 
crazy!" - can you clarify what you mean?

Robert Kaiser