[Foundation-l] Attribution survey, first results

[Anthony]

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:

> 2009/3/4 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> > I imagine
> >> most Wikimedians are sufficiently mature to accept it if the majority
> >> disagree with them.
> >>
> >
> > Accept what, that the majority disagrees with them?  If that's what you
> > mean, yeah, most Wikimedians are.
>
> Accept that they've lost the argument and move on.
>

This is more than just an "argument" if it's being used to purport to give
copyright licenses away.  In fact, it's not much of an "argument" at all -
arguments aren't won by voting, unless you're defining the "argument" as
which position more people agree with.


>
> > (This is assuming only options actually legal
> >> under the license are considered.)
> >>
> >
> > I don't think that caveat has been met, though I'd present a higher one
> > either.  Only ethical options should be considered.  Mere legality isn't
> > sufficient.
>
> How are you going to define "ethical"? It's an entirely subjective
> concept, a vote is pretty much the only way we can handle it.


I define ethical as that which promotes "the good life".  I don't think it's
subjective at all.