Craig Franklin <cfranklin(a)halonetwork.net> writes:
any action that would injure the movement would also
injure the Foundation by definition. Denny is quite correct that trustees
have a legal obligation to put the Foundation before anything else, however
there's usually a fair bit of latitude in how that obligation
is interpreted.
Yes.
DGG writes:
Rather, the movement is to create a model of free
human interaction and
work, and the initial way of exemplifying this is in the various versions
of the encyclopedia.
+100. Edit this a bit and it will be a perfect quote.
a model of free cooperative expression of the
manifestations of human intellectual work and creativity... is
fundamentally and radically in conflict with such formal organization...
< To
the extent we need it, it is only to serve some limited purposes
necessary in the economic and legal world as it is.
<
Unfortunately... human history shows that structures
intended to have
such limited supporting purposes do not easily remain in this limited role
I appreciate this long view. It is true, similar to the arc that leads to
policy creep even where it is counterprouctive; and each requires steady
awareness to balance.