[License-discuss] discussion of L-R process [was Re: [License-review] Approval: Server Side Public License, Version 2 (SSPL v2)]

[Andrew DeMarsh]

First I apologize for replying to multiple emails in this thread in one
email:


> The OSI board votes, and we receive no tally naming directors and their
> votes yay or nay, nor their rationale for voting as they did. This makes it
> difficult for us to determine how we should vote for OSI directors
>

I would echo Bruce's sentiment. As an individual member, how is it possible
as the current board exist's and functions to be an informed voter?
Currently There is no way. We have the capability to record/stream video
and audio easily via many services for free over something as everyday as a
cell phone. I would encourage the OSI to begin some form of minutes whether
it be video or audio recording so that we can be informed in our choices.


> IMO there really is a hump that people have to get over to be good
> contributors, and it is a significant one.
>
This hump as you describe it, is only worsened by the medium by which many
of the discussions surrounding these idea's take place. I've followed this
mailing list for a number of years and there is always a number of
discussions that repeatedly pop up with very much the same conclusions.
This is usually met with "cleverly" worded complaints stating there
tiredness/disinterest in discussing the topic again and, when asked to
reference/reread these discussions most state they are not able to or
unwilling to invest that kind of time to locate them. If L-R and L-D
actually would like to have new, thoughtful input from others on topics
that haven't been beaten to death, either a better front-end to the mailing
list should be used or as Mr. Hillburn mentioned a new medium altogether
(such as discourse) be used.

Thanks,

Andrew DeMarsh

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 3:57 PM Bruce Perens <bruce at perens.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 12:26 PM Ben Hilburn <bhilburn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> it's important and good to say, "the process is open and anyone can
>> contribute," but that doesn't mean that everyone actually feels welcome to
>> do so, or that their opinions would be valued.
>>
>
> So, this is why I don't contribute technically to your organization, GNU
> Radio. I don't know as much about signal processing as Michelle Thompson,
> and would be more of a drag than an asset.
>
> License review is really complicated and my views have continued to evolve
> after 21 years of participation. For example, I originally lobbied for Open
> Hardware licenses, and now evangelize the harm that attempting to copyright
> hardware designs can ultimately cause all of us. We get sentiment from
> relative newbies like "wouldn't it be cool to have better licenses for Open
> Data", when actually *owning the facts *could wreak a great deal of harm.
> So, IMO there really is a hump that people have to get over to be good
> contributors, and it is a significant one.
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Bruce
> _______________________________________________
> License-discuss mailing list
> License-discuss at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20190315/e6fd62a6/attachment.html>