[License-discuss] Thoughts on the subject of ethical licenses

[Pamela Chestek]

All,

We'd like to remind everyone that ad hominem attacks are not acceptable
and will ultimately lead to negative consequences for the sender. If
anyone believes that an email was inappropriate, either expressly or
implicitly, please bring it to the moderators' attention.

Thanks,
Pam

Pamela Chestek
Chair, License Review Committee
Open Source Initiative

On 3/10/2020 8:25 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 3/10/20 9:18 AM, Gil Yehuda via License-discuss wrote:
>> I think discussions are good. But Coraline's message this morning is
>> that she's not continuing to be part of this discussion. Moreover her
>> message indicates that she's been gathering feedback from this
>> discussion in service to enhancements to her work. Which means that we
>> should consider the value of continuing this conversation. We have an
>> open list (consistent with our ethos), the ethical source movement's
>> communications channel is not open. So this is asymmetric at best. The
>> way she framed her message makes it seem exploitative.
> Coraline showed *tremendous* patience with a list discussion not exactly
> marked by good faith or good manners on the part of at least half the
> posts.  Your attempt to portray her as some kind of villian for leaving
> the list should be well beneath the dignity of a senior manager.  If
> nothing else, it reflects poorly on your employer.
>