On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 16:51 -0400, Brian Mathis wrote: > On 6/6/07, pctech at mybellybutton.com <pctech at mybellybutton.com> wrote: > >> On 6/6/07, > >> Please don't start this again. You can view last year's argument > >> about this here: > >> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2006-August/thread.html#67803 > >> > >> PCtech: You are certainly entitled to control your copyrighted > >> material however you like, but if you look at how the rest of the open > >> source community handles this type of information, you must be able to > >> see that the method you are using is not typical. It's the type of > >> thing that makes other people uncomfortable. Again, you are > >> completely entitled to handle it however you like, but you need to > >> expect people will consider your method unsavory. > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------- > >> > > It is VERY typical in the open source community. Name me ONE open source project that just ANYONE can submit changes to that will go live without some sort of vetting process. You can't. Because there are none. A large percentage of the open source projects don't even accept submissions from people that aren't on the development team. > > > > I don't need to expect anything of the sort. I don't HAVE to offer this document, or any of the future ones, to people. I do it because I WANT to. For the good of the community as it were. That doesn't mean that I have to give up all of my rights to who can actually change the document that I spent the time to write. How is the way I am disseminating it ANY less "savory" than posting it on a web site for people to download? Because I choose e-mail? It allows ME to control the cost of disseminating the information. It allows ME to control the alterations to my document. I've tried disseminating things in a wiki format before. No thanks. One letter from a lawyer was quite enough. I don't know about you, but *I* don't want to have to defend myself against someone for something that I give out for free and wrote, initially, for myself. > > > > > I'm sorry dude, but you need a SERIOUS attitude adjustment. You are > just lashing out at people, even those who are not attacking you. > (it's sufficient to respond once to a thread; you don't need to reply > to every single message). > Actually, I haven't lashed out at anyone. People have chosen to lash out at me due to my chosen distribution method. I answer each and every message so that people don't think that I am ignoring them or their comments. > Quite frankly, your argument is kind of ridiculous. You can easily > control who has access to change a document, and you don't even need > to use a wiki. A regular html page doesn't allow anyone but you to > edit it. All you _really_ need to say is "this is how I choose to do > it", but if you start making silly arguments, it makes you sound, > well, silly. > I guess you didn't see the part where I don't have the bandwidth to host the document. Never once have I stated that anyone else wasn't free to host the document if they so chose. They're the silly ones for getting "bitchy" about my chosen distribution method. > No one is telling you that you need to do it, and if you want to only > distribute through email, that's your choice. The main point of my > message was to say that many people won't like your choice, so do not > be surprised at the reaction. No... Rather than telling me I *MUST* do this or that they're bitching that I didn't choose to do this or that. At the end of the day it's not alot different. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- --------------------------------------------------- Frank Tanner III (pctech at mybellybutton.com) ICQ: 1730844 AIM: KalokSundancer MSN: pctech at mybellybutton.com YIM: fbtanner