On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 12:35:24PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > > This proposal seems to me to be intellectually dishonest, in the sense > > that it makes worse the underlying conflicts it purports to solve.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:32:40PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > I disagree. It is frank and blunt as to its intent and purpose. That > people who actually want to remove non-free from our distribution have > been manipulated into a corner through filibustering of all alternative > means of bringing this issue to a vote is what it is dishonest. I was talking about the "drop non-free, but don't amend the social contract" proposal. I get the idea you're talking about the "drop non-free and drop clause 5 of the social contract" proposal. If so, we're talking past each other. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
