[OSM-talk] CC-BY-SA still available?

[Frederik Ramm]

David,

David Murn wrote:
> Did I just seriously read that right?

*Sigh*

You know as well as I do that Anthony is a troll with a long history, 
here and elsewhere. He knows perfectly well, because he has been told a 
thousand times, that one of the countries where CC-BY-SA doesn't work 
for our data is his country of residence, the USA. He has gone on 
record, multiple times, saying that he likes the CC-BY-SA precisely 
because he belives that it doesn't work. So him asking, in that innocent 
manner, "which countries would that be", is just prime trolling, hoping 
that someone takes the bait and he can, yet again, involve everyone into 
a word-mincing discussion that gets us precisely nowhere.

Now everybody has their own way of reacting to such trolls. The best way 
is of course to ignore them; but every now and then you have to react 
lest new readers of this list might get the impression that Anthony's 
question was *not* answered and discussed a thousand times. You could 
also get all agressive and dump a bucket of swear words over Anthony; it 
would certainly be well deserved but tends to poison the mood.

So I chose a slightly humorous response, treating Anthony as if he 
really were an innocent newbie.

I didn't expect that I would have to explain the humour, but I guess I 
should have known better.

> Is this a sign of things to come?  Is this really the way that OSMF will
> treat new contributors in the future?

I am not OSMF. And it is neither the task nor the privilege of OSMF to 
"treat" new contributors.

I think my message was entirely in order. Even a newbie could be 
expected to read at least a few articles of background on our Wiki 
before engaging in a discussion. Anyone reading e.g. 
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Why_CC_BY-SA_is_Unsuitable 
would immediately be informed that the USA is one of the countries in 
which CC-BY-SA won't work for our data.

> Wouldnt it be easier to simply answer the question, if you really had
> anything substantial to contribute?  While we all understand that you
> believe licence nitty-gritty (or, anything about the licence for that
> matter, even data removal) should be on legal-talk, surely it would be
> easier to simply answer some simple easy questions with simple easy
> answers, rather than forcing people to read legalese (or the more likely
> option, that they just abandon OSM completely).

As you probably know, Anthony's account on OSM has been terminated 
because he openly boasted about violating copyright. He is one of the 
very few people whose net contribution to OSM is indeed negative. He did 
not ask this question because he was truly interested in anything; his 
only motive was to drag us all into a repetition of discussions we've 
already had a thousand times, into wasting precious time and words for 
nothing.

And thanks to you he has once again succeeded.

I will now stop responding to your messages because you seem to lack 
either the ability or the willingness to understand what I'm saying, and 
it is quite taxing for me to express everything in a way that cannot 
possibly be misread by you. Perhaps others have more luck in trying to 
explain things to you.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"