On 24/08/07, Kat Walsh kat@mindspillage.org wrote:
On 8/24/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/08/07, Kat Walsh kat@mindspillage.org wrote:
On 8/24/07, michael west michawest@gmail.com
I'm not a lwayer but doesn't the sentence before you agree to the
GFDL
say
that other editors will rip your contributions apart mercilessly?
(or
words
to that effect - "If you don't want your writing to be edited
mercilessly or
redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it.") I am quite
sure
that
that is a shorthand definition of GFDL!
That's not intended to be explaining the GFDL! It's a statement of general editorial philosophy which just so happens to be one allowed by the license, or rather, that the license was chosen to allow. :-)
-Kat
ok, thats not our (WP) free for all? So editorial philosophy can
actually
overide any editors desire to submit under a license which gives him
more
rights than what we will do (speedy delete, PROD)?
I'm not sure how you got any of that out of what I said. (And I'm not certain that I understand what you mean.)
-Kat
What I meant was before any editor is directed to the actual GFDL license, they are treated with our "editorial philosophy" - write it and weep! It isn't GFDL in a nutshell and earlier David said that GFDL can never be in a nutshell. Either ditch the write it and weep (you may be edited MERCILICILLY) or pop up the whole GFDL before every post and agree, like you ndo with every piece of software. or ditch it and license everything to the foundation, with a clause saying that "it" will not be indemnified etc...........