[OSM-talk] odbl

[Martijn van Exel]

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Elizabeth Dodd <edodd at billiau.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Mar 2011 03:45:45 -0800 (PST)
> Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>
>> Joseph Reeves wrote:
>> > without explaining in layman's terms what this means.
>>
>> http://old.opengeodata.org/2008/01/07/the-licence-where-we-are-where-were-going/index.html
>>
>> Follow-ups to legal-talk please, so that those here who have made
>> their mind up one way or the other don't have to read the whole
>> caboodle all over again.
>>
>> cheers
>> Richard
>>
>>
> Once again, there is not any hope that a clear explanation in Plain
> English will appear to a request on legal-talk.
> There is not a prohibition on asking these questions on /talk/, just a
> determined effort by a small number of people to ensure that discussion
> on /talk/ is limited, which is not part of the description of /talk/.

The discussion is not being limited, it's just being funneled to its
proper place. I like talk because it exposes me to a variety of topics
that are alive in the community today. I also like it for its
manageable volume. Lengthy debates on topics that have their own
designated lists - be it dev, local lists *or* legal - make it less
manageable and are bound to get people to lose interest and
unsubscribe. I think that would be a shame.

>
> The fact that the question appears each month, from somebody new, shows
> me that the question never gets answered in a satisfactory manner.
> There are still a large number of unanswered questions.

What it shows is that there's always going to be people interested in
the license questions that do not know where to turn to for an answer.
This list gets a lot of those type of questions, because of its
catch-all topic description. And lots of times, people are directed to
the right place to get an answer. This is no different, so why make it
sound like it is?

-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://about.me/mvexel