This once I actually agree with Grokl.. :-)

Posted Oct 22, 2010 2:18 UTC (Fri) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048)
In reply to: This once I actually agree with Grokl.. :-) by jthill
Parent article: Open Standards in Europe: FSFE responds to BSA letter

I admit I was imprecise by referring to just the passage he quoted and that one term. There are other references in the published part of that license agreement that are not boilerplate and do make it clear that a payment had to be made.

This once I actually agree with Grokl.. :-)

Posted Oct 22, 2010 17:29 UTC (Fri) by jthill (subscriber, #56558) [Link] (2 responses)

Mr. Mueller, I believe you've now spent more words misrepresenting the FSFE's view and "imprecise"ly dwelling on that falsified view than they spent stating their actual view.

I suppose some sort of congratulations are in order.

This once I actually agree with Grokl.. :-)

Posted Oct 22, 2010 17:32 UTC (Fri) by FlorianMueller (guest, #32048) [Link] (1 responses)

Do you think a statement like this is in any way a helpful contribution to a discussion? If you believe something is wrong, or if you disagree, you can suggest a correction or present a different view. If you do it clearly enough so that one doesn't have to guess what you actually mean, then that's useful. I had to ask question after question to find out what you actually meant. I hope in your profession as a notary public you make it easier for people to understand you.

Far less elegant

Posted Oct 24, 2010 22:29 UTC (Sun) by man_ls (guest, #15091) [Link]

Why bother, it's like punching a tar pit (and I've been there). I sure hope that jthill avoids tar pits in his profession with the same elegance that he has done here.