<div dir="ltr">Van,<div><br></div><div>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?</div><div><br></div><div>The answer is no, it's not polite. So he got some rather heated responses and I have zero sympathy. I also do not believe that the discussion is being done "in good faith".</div><div><br></div><div>So yes, he, and his horse, are welcome to go elsewhere with this subject.</div><div><br></div><div>Nigel</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 11:33 AM VanL <<a href="mailto:van.lindberg@gmail.com">van.lindberg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>Hi Russell,<br><div><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 9:36 AM Russell McOrmond <<a href="mailto:russellmcormond@gmail.com" target="_blank">russellmcormond@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:21 PM VanL <<a href="mailto:van.lindberg@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">van.lindberg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>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 results in "de-platforming" of those who would express an otherwise radical idea.<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I'm trying to understand the logic behind this discussion.</div><div><br></div><div>The context was in discussing the concept of a "Persona Non Grata" clause in licenses, the purpose of which is to name, shame and discriminate against individuals and groups. Not only should this concept be immediately understood as incompatible with the non-discriminatory aspects of the OSD, but the suggestion that we as a community should be accepting naming-and-shaming should be rejected by a code of conduct.</div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The logic is that discussing naming-and-shaming as a concept is different than actually holding a person up for ridicule or derision.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">We can discuss the concept without actually implementing it. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">...and the conclusion regarding the concept was that we should not do it, so it is almost axiomatic that we should take our own advice in this respect.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thanks,</div><div dir="auto">Van</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
License-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:License-discuss@lists.opensource.org" target="_blank">License-discuss@lists.opensource.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div>