Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On 2/28/20 8:36 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Feel free, however, to translate between people of different styles > of communication. Oh, please. Prolific profanity and personal attacks are not a "style of communication", they're just childish behavior. And, more importantly, violations of the Co

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Josh Berkus dixit: >And yet you just managed to make a spirited refutation of the license >header proposal without once resorting to name-calling and profanity. >So clearly it is possible for any civilized human to do so. There’s quite a distance between the first two quoted lines of yours and th

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 9:24 AM Nigel T wrote: > It is rude and disrespectful to go to someone else’s home and continue > to prosthelytize your beliefs when previously told “sorry, no, those > beliefs are incompatible with mine”. > > Sent from my iPhone (because Apple isn’t unethical to me) > *s

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

I apologize for stepping into this thread, but we all get the point, so I hope we can move on. With each volley of email, each well meaning thread, or statement of support or disagreement, will eventually deteriorate into the same level of discourse. I do like the Talking Heads lyric of “say

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

I believe this meta-discussion has run its course and suggest it would be a good time for everyone to take a break from it. Pam Pamela Chestek Chair, License Review Committee Open Source Initiative ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@list

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

This list has seen a moderating voice "de-platformed" because someone conflated the "scream bloody murder" idiom with actual violence. I'm all for civility but some folks use that as a weapon against others. The whole "ethical software" concept is antithetical to open source because it is, as oth

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

It is rude and disrespectful to go to someone else’s home and continue to prosthelytize your beliefs when previously told “sorry, no, those beliefs are incompatible with mine”. Sent from my iPhone (because Apple isn’t unethical to me) > On Feb 27, 2020, at 5:10 PM, VanL wrote: > >  > > >>

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Van, When told politely that the objective is incompatible with the goals of open source is it polite to continue to push the agenda and start a new topic to attempt to continue the discussion? The answer is no, it's not polite. So he got some rather heated responses and I have zero sympathy. I

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On 2/27/20 1:49 PM, Russell McOrmond wrote: > > I think you have this backwards.   The mailing list to discuss ideas > compatable with the OSD are the lists hosted by opensource.org > .  This community will (most often politely) > inform people when their ideas are incompata

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On 2/26/20 4:45 PM, VanL wrote: > Strong opinions can be expressed without sharp language.  That doesn't > mean that we don't have strong opinions, or that we don't try to express > them as cogently and persuasively as we can. My point - or at least one > of my points - is that sharp language is us

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On 2/27/20 6:35 AM, Russell McOrmond wrote: > Some might even suggest he is being de-platformed by being blocked from > expressing personal political views.  I'm not suggesting this, as I'm > advocating strongly that those who wish to use software and software > licenses to discriminate be invited

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Following in my capacity as a Board member of the OSI: On 2/28/2020 7:46 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > VM Brasseur (OSI) dixit: > >> The purpose of the list is right there, as they say, on the tin: >> license discuss. > Ooooh, but you forgot to quote the most important part! > > It says, in total:

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

VM Brasseur (OSI) dixit: >The purpose of the list is right there, as they say, on the tin: >license discuss. Ooooh, but you forgot to quote the most important part! It says, in total: ‣‣‣ license-discuss@lists.opensource.org There’s an “opensource” in there that, as hosted by the OSI, directly

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

The purpose of the list is right there, as they say, on the tin: license discuss. We are all here to discuss, learn, research, share, and investigate the world of software licenses as they pertain to open source. Josh, Van, Gil, and others have stated as such, and I'm grateful to each of them fo

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Quoting McCoy Smith (mc...@lexpan.law): > > > > On Feb 27, 2020, at 9:24 AM, VanL wrote: > > > >  > > The logic is that discussing naming-and-shaming as a concept is different > > than actually holding a person up for ridicule or derision. > > > > We can discuss the concept without actually

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Joshua R. Simmons dixit: >I just want to underscore that this is, indeed, meant to be a place where >we can discuss licenses ;-) Ones that improve Open Source, sure. Licences that introduce new arbitrary restrictions… not so much. bye, //mirabilos -- “It is inappropriate to require that a time

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

t; not that's where this topic has been dragged. > > > Original message > From: Russell McOrmond > Date: 2020-02-27 5:28 p.m. (GMT-05:00) > To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas > >

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

al message From: Russell McOrmond Date: 2020-02-27 5:28 p.m. (GMT-05:00) To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 1:01 PM Josh Berkus wrote: To paraphrase the above: "It's only deplatform

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 3:50 PM Russell McOrmond wrote: > > I think you have this backwards. The mailing list to discuss ideas > compatable with the OSD are the lists hosted by opensource.org. This > community will (most often politely) inform people when their ideas are > incompatable with on

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 1:01 PM Josh Berkus wrote: > To paraphrase the above: "It's only deplatforming if it's me or my > friends. If it's someone I don't agree with, they're just whining." > Decades ago my actual friends bought me a T-Shirt https://geekz.co.uk/shop/store/show/eler-tshirt.html

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

> On Feb 27, 2020, at 9:24 AM, VanL wrote: > >  > The logic is that discussing naming-and-shaming as a concept is different > than actually holding a person up for ridicule or derision. > > We can discuss the concept without actually implementing it. > > There was some name and shame lang

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Hi Russell, On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 9:36 AM Russell McOrmond wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:21 PM VanL wrote: > >> Further, if we really believe in the importance of ideas, and the >> importance of speech to express those ideas, even ones we disagree with, we >> should act in a fashion that

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:21 PM VanL wrote: > Further, if we really believe in the importance of ideas, and the > importance of speech to express those ideas, even ones we disagree with, we > should act in a fashion that allows us the broadest exposure to those > different ideas. Sharp language r

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

iscount an idea altogether the more likely you missed a loophole, greater threat or worse yet an opportunity to learn. Original message From: VanL Date: 2020-02-26 10:24 p.m. (GMT-05:00) To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Language, appro

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Hi Andrew, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I agree that Free Software was developed based upon a particular moral and ethical point of view. I also think you are correct that the moral foundations of FOSS text to attract many people with strong moral convictions. That said, there is an essentia

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

-- Original message From: Russell McOrmond Date: 2020-02-26 7:32 p.m. (GMT-05:00) To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:29 PM VanL wrote:the right of ESR to share them - this isn'

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Hi Russell, Strong opinions can be expressed without sharp language. That doesn't mean that we don't have strong opinions, or that we don't try to express them as cogently and persuasively as we can. My point - or at least one of my points - is that sharp language is usually less effective in bei

Re: [License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:29 PM VanL wrote: > the right of ESR to share them - this isn't "appropriateness as > censorship." But in my experience, such strong language is usually not > effective in changing opinions, and it can lead to a situation where we > only hear from people who agree with u

[License-discuss] Language, appropriateness, and ideas

Having recently borne the brunt of a number of very pointed comments, both on- and off-lis, I wanted to share a few thoughts about language and how we react to people with different ideas. 1. We should start out from a stance where people should be free to express their ideas. Absent evidence of