Return to Answer

I get from your comments ("in response to specific concerns about the license not being appropriate") that the current situation might be less than ideal (lots of people think it is) - but I don't really know enough about the legalities behind it to suggest what to do. But I trust SE enough to believe there must be an issue if they want to change something.

I can, however, read feedback. Which it seems you haven't.

This is an important topic - but you say this:

"Both changes were thoroughly vetted internally, with our lawyers, and with the OSI. We think they are an improvement upon the previous proposal, and a vast improvement upon the status quo."

The main thing that is missing is the community being involved. Sure, you've asked us on Meta.SE (the wrong place) and you've posted a banner containing this:

"Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and addressing your concerns after the new year."

Highlighting mine.

I assume this is said follow-up - but I don't think it has done either of those points.

You've not answered any questions here - certainly not mine. Most notably, "What is code"?

And the "addressed the concerns" part? Let's check the first post. It had 592 upvotes and 95 down, so 86% of people "agree". It also has 37497 views, so only around 1.8% of people voted on it. Maybe that could be off by a factor of 5. That's not a lot of people.

You seem to be ignoring the concerns I've read. These comments come from the top answers. I'm not cherry picking - the top 12 are negative.

As much as I love SE (I really do admire what you have made), you seem to have ignored this quite a lot. Maybe this is as SE get's bigger, it's harder to involve the community. Maybe the SE format of Upvote and Downvote is not the right way to get feedback on this. And (almost certainly) Meta SE is the wrong audience.

The top answer has 460 upvotes and 23 down. That suggests that 95% of people agree with them. And disagree with you. That's throws the 86% figure out the window, eh?

Sure, something seems to be done. But you're a) Twisting the facts and biasing the vote by posting here, b) Not suggesting the right thing (I don't know what that is) but this is not based on other answers and c) not doing what you said you would - answering questions of addressing concerns.

I get from your comments ("in response to specific concerns about the license not being appropriate") that the current situation might be less than ideal (lots of people think it is) - but I don't really know enough about the legalities behind it to suggest what to do. But I trust SE enough to believe there must be an issue if they want to change something.

I can, however, read feedback. Which it seems you haven't.

This is an important topic - but you say this:

"Both changes were thoroughly vetted internally, with our lawyers, and with the OSI. We think they are an improvement upon the previous proposal, and a vast improvement upon the status quo."

The main thing that is missing is the community being involved. Sure, you've asked us on Meta.SE (the wrong place) and you've posted a banner containing this:

"Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and addressing your concerns after the new year."

Highlighting mine.

I assume this is said follow-up - but I don't think it has done either of those points.

You've not answered any questions here - certainly not mine. Most notably, "What is code"?

And the "addressed the concerns" part? Let's check the first post. It had 592 upvotes and 95 down, so 86% of people "agree". It also has 37497 views, so only around 1.8% of people voted on it. Maybe that could be off by a factor of 5. That's not a lot of people.

You seem to be ignoring the concerns I've read. These comments come from the top answers. I'm not cherry picking - the top 12 are negative.

As much as I love SE (I really do admire what you have made), you seem to have ignored this quite a lot. Maybe this is as SE get's bigger, it's harder to involve the community. Maybe the SE format of Upvote and Downvote is not the right way to get feedback on this. And (almost certainly) Meta SE is the wrong audience.

The top answer has 460 upvotes and 23 down. That suggests that 95% of people agree with them. And disagree with you. That's throws the 86% figure out the window, eh?

Sure, something seems to be done. But you're a) Twisting the facts and biasing the vote by posting here, b) Not suggesting the right thing (I don't know what that is) but this is not based on other answers and c) not doing what you said you would - answering questions of addressing concerns.

For anyone interested, here is the Word Cloud of the first announcement:

And here is it for this one:

I get from your comments ("in response to specific concerns about the license not being appropriate") that the current situation might be less than ideal (lots of people think it is) - but I don't really know enough about the legalities behind it to suggest what to do. But I trust SE enough to believe there must be an issue if they want to change something.

I can, however, read feedback. Which it seems you haven't.

This is an important topic - but you say this:

"Both changes were thoroughly vetted internally, with our lawyers, and with the OSI. We think they are an improvement upon the previous proposal, and a vast improvement upon the status quo."

The main thing that is missing is the community being involved. Sure, you've asked us on Meta.SE (the wrong place) and you've posted a banner containing this:

"Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and addressing your concerns after the new year."

Highlighting mine.

I assume this is said follow-up - but I don't think it has done either of those points.

You've not answered any questions here - certainly not mine. Most notably, "What is code"?

And the "addressed the concerns" part? Let's check the first post. It had 592 upvotes and 95 down, so 86% of people "agree". It also has 37497 views, so only around 1.8% of people voted on it. Maybe that could be off by a factor of 5. That's not a lot of people.

You seem to be ignoring the concerns I've read. These comments come from the top answers. I'm not cherry picking - the top 12 are negative.

As much as I love SE (I really do admire what you have made), you seem to have ignored this quite a lot. Maybe this is as SE get's bigger, it's harder to involve the community. Maybe the SE format of Upvote and Downvote is not the right way to get feedback on this. And (almost certainly) Meta SE is the wrong audience.

The top answer has 460 upvotes and 23 down. That suggests that 95% of people agree with them. And disagree with you. That's throws the 86% figure out the window, eh?

Sure, something seems to be done. But you're a) Twisting the facts and biasing the vote by posting here, b) Not suggesting the right thing (I don't know what that is) but this is not and c) not doing what you said you would - answering questions of addressing concerns.

I get from your comments ("in response to specific concerns about the license not being appropriate") that the current situation might be less than ideal (lots of people think it is) - but I don't really know enough about the legalities behind it to suggest what to do. But I trust SE enough to believe there must be an issue if they want to change something.

I can, however, read feedback. Which it seems you haven't.

This is an important topic - but you say this:

"Both changes were thoroughly vetted internally, with our lawyers, and with the OSI. We think they are an improvement upon the previous proposal, and a vast improvement upon the status quo."

The main thing that is missing is the community being involved. Sure, you've asked us on Meta.SE (the wrong place) and you've posted a banner containing this:

"Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and addressing your concerns after the new year."

Highlighting mine.

I assume this is said follow-up - but I don't think it has done either of those points.

You've not answered any questions here - certainly not mine. Most notably, "What is code"?

And the "addressed the concerns" part? Let's check the first post. It had 592 upvotes and 95 down, so 86% of people "agree". It also has 37497 views, so only around 1.8% of people voted on it. Maybe that could be off by a factor of 5. That's not a lot of people.

You seem to be ignoring the concerns I've read. These comments come from the top answers. I'm not cherry picking - the top 12 are negative.

As much as I love SE (I really do admire what you have made), you seem to have ignored this quite a lot. Maybe this is as SE get's bigger, it's harder to involve the community. Maybe the SE format of Upvote and Downvote is not the right way to get feedback on this. And (almost certainly) Meta SE is the wrong audience.

The top answer has 460 upvotes and 23 down. That suggests that 95% of people agree with them. And disagree with you. That's throws the 86% figure out the window, eh?

Sure, something seems to be done. But you're a) Twisting the facts and biasing the vote by posting here, b) Not suggesting the right thing (I don't know what that is) but this is not based on other answers and c) not doing what you said you would - answering questions of addressing concerns.

I get from your comments ("in response to specific concerns about the license not being appropriate") that the current situation might be less than ideal (lots of people think it is) - but I don't really know enough about the legalities behind it to suggest what to do. But I trust SE enough to believe there must be an issue if they want to change something.

I do, however, know how to read feedback.

This is an important topic - but you say this:

"Both changes were thoroughly vetted internally, with our lawyers, and with the OSI. We think they are an improvement upon the previous proposal, and a vast improvement upon the status quo."

The main thing that is missing is the community being involved. Sure, you've asked us on Meta.SE (the wrong place) and you've posted a banner containing this:

"Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and addressing your concerns after the new year."

Highlighting mine.

I assume this is said follow-up - but I don't think it has done either of those points.

You've not answered any questions here - certainly not mine. Most notably, "What is code"?

And the "addressed the concerns" part? Let's check the first post. It had 592 upvotes and 95 down, so 86% of people "agree". It also has 37497 views, so only around 1.8% of people voted on it. Maybe that could be off by a factor of 5. That's not a lot of people.

You seem to be ignoring the concerns I've read. These comments come from the top 12 answers. I'm not cherry picking - the top 12 are negative.

I've shifted my opinion from "I'm not sure" to "Please reconsider — this is truly awful"
MIT License: inappropriate for questions, ... MIT License: inappropriate for answers
License fragmentation is bad
In summary, please don't do this to us.
Please don't add a blanket exception to the attribution requirements.
What?!
It would be best to make a new license
Fix your footer "attribution required" link
Sorry but I think this is a pretty terrible idea.
I'm not sure that this would be a good move
Please make it clear
Your proposal is legally dubious

As much as I love SE (I really do admire what you have made), you seem to have ignored this quite a lot. Maybe this is as SE get's bigger, it's harder to involve the community. Maybe the SE format of Upvote and Downvote is not the right way to get feedback on this. And (almost certainly) Meta SE is the wrong audience.

The top answer has 460 upvotes and 23 down. That suggests that 95% of people agree with them. And disagree with you. That's throws the 86% figure out the window, eh?

Sure, something seems to be done. But you're a) Twisting the facts and biasing the vote by posting here, b) Not suggesting the right thing (I don't know what that is) but this is not and c) not doing what you said you would - answering questions of addressing concerns.

I get from your comments ("in response to specific concerns about the license not being appropriate") that the current situation might be less than ideal (lots of people think it is) - but I don't really know enough about the legalities behind it to suggest what to do. But I trust SE enough to believe there must be an issue if they want to change something.

I can, however, read feedback. Which it seems you haven't.

This is an important topic - but you say this:

"Both changes were thoroughly vetted internally, with our lawyers, and with the OSI. We think they are an improvement upon the previous proposal, and a vast improvement upon the status quo."

The main thing that is missing is the community being involved. Sure, you've asked us on Meta.SE (the wrong place) and you've posted a banner containing this:

"Thanks, everyone, for your feedback to this proposal. We're going to digest this one over the holidays and should have a follow-up announcement answering your questions and addressing your concerns after the new year."

Highlighting mine.

I assume this is said follow-up - but I don't think it has done either of those points.

You've not answered any questions here - certainly not mine. Most notably, "What is code"?

And the "addressed the concerns" part? Let's check the first post. It had 592 upvotes and 95 down, so 86% of people "agree". It also has 37497 views, so only around 1.8% of people voted on it. Maybe that could be off by a factor of 5. That's not a lot of people.

You seem to be ignoring the concerns I've read. These comments come from the top answers. I'm not cherry picking - the top 12 are negative.

As much as I love SE (I really do admire what you have made), you seem to have ignored this quite a lot. Maybe this is as SE get's bigger, it's harder to involve the community. Maybe the SE format of Upvote and Downvote is not the right way to get feedback on this. And (almost certainly) Meta SE is the wrong audience.

The top answer has 460 upvotes and 23 down. That suggests that 95% of people agree with them. And disagree with you. That's throws the 86% figure out the window, eh?

Sure, something seems to be done. But you're a) Twisting the facts and biasing the vote by posting here, b) Not suggesting the right thing (I don't know what that is) but this is not and c) not doing what you said you would - answering questions of addressing concerns.