[OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes

[John Smith]

On 7 July 2011 16:58, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> While they started out wishing OSM to suffer the least possible damage,
> their ego now forces them to demand the most rigid - even absurd - data
> deletion policies for the license change lest they look like idiots for
> starting a fork in the first place.

And what is it you wish by forcing bad terms into the CT just so OSM
might be able to go PD in future, although some of those abilities
have been lost in the process it would seem, you seem to be a firm
believer in PD, why are you settling for second best all of a sudden?

I guess the thought of excessive data loss was unpalatable after all.

> Needless to say, this interesting psychological situation is not a good
> basis for a rational argument.

It seems the only one basing arguments on emotive language in this
thread is yourself, glass houses and not throwing stones and all that.