On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 5:21 PM Rick Moen <r...@linuxmafia.com> wrote: > > I cannot help wondering if Luis is seeking to solve the wrong problem. > (As co-author of an essay on seeking help on technical problems, 'How to > Ask Questions the Smart Way', I've seen a good bit of that.) If the > main problem is 'Sometimes, net.random participants on OSI mailing lists > are misunderstood to be somehow reflecting the position of OSI', then > perhaps the appropriate remedy is a stronger social convention for > official OSI representatives to always identify themselves as such and > state when they are speaking officially.
I've tried recently (I didn't do this before the past year) to use my opensource.org email address to signal this. > You could also alter the Mailman listinfo pages and new-subscriber text > for license-review and license-discuss to stress these being public > mailing lists open to any member of the public willing to abide by the > code of conduct, and should NOT be assumed to speak for OSI unless so > indicated. However, to be rather blunt, I believe the recently > disgruntled commenters are entirely aware of that fact, and, if they are > not merely attempting passive-aggressive kickback against License > Committee decisions they didn't like, are not easily distinguished from > that interpretation. I suspect so as well. Richard -- _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
