Timeline for A New Code License: The MIT, this time with Attribution Required
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2016 at 8:13 | comment | added | Nemo | Indeed it seems StackExchange is not doing their homework. They might have hired a teacher (but why not someone more experienced like FSF, CC, EFF or Software Conservancy?) but they apparently didn't ask to be taught about dual-licensing among other things meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272956/… | |
| Jan 17, 2016 at 16:07 | comment | added | ghosts_in_the_code | @Fermiparadox Even if 90% of the users give useless feedback, that doesn't mean they all will down-vote. I would have agreed to the fact that people are down-voting excessively if the mod had provided justification the new license over the old (in layman's terms). Since he hasn't, the post is poorly written, for starters. If this was a feature-request by a user instead of a declaration by a mod, it would have been closed due to lack of reasoning given. | |
| Jan 17, 2016 at 16:01 | comment | added | user | @ghosts_in_the_code Why not? | |
| Jan 17, 2016 at 16:00 | comment | added | ghosts_in_the_code | @Fermiparadox Not against a unanimous feedback | |
| Jan 17, 2016 at 15:58 | comment | added | user | @ghosts_in_the_code My comment was related to the "Why must you dictate" part of the answer. Dictating sometimes can be very beneficial. | |
| Jan 17, 2016 at 15:52 | comment | added | ghosts_in_the_code | @Fermiparadox But how will you get the 10% useful feedback if you don't provide the reasoning behind your decisions? | |
| Jan 16, 2016 at 9:07 | comment | added | user | Check what the creator of SO states under his "90% of all community feedback is crap". (he is right). | |
| Jan 15, 2016 at 16:50 | comment | added | Travis J | @TimPost - A teacher? You need to hire a real law firm. Researchers have terrible track records when it comes to the private sector. | |
| Jan 15, 2016 at 5:43 | history | edited | ghosts_in_the_code | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 176 characters in body
|
| Jan 15, 2016 at 2:20 | comment | added | 286110 | They are very much capable of deciding and that is clearly visible in their previous and this version of proposal. (It is another matter how an SE user perceive their decision: clear and helpful or ambiguous) What they are trying to see here is what the community think about their decision, since no matter how hard they try, community (given its diverse nature) has the possibility of coming up with a better decision or at least with some critical input which may have been overlooked during decision making. The problem I see in your answer is that I don't understand why it has been posted. | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 20:28 | comment | added | Tim | @TimPost You're normally really good at this - but recently that has... changed. I'd like to see at least the impression of democracy back. What's the point in these posts if you give the impressions you've decided everything? | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 18:14 | comment | added | ghosts_in_the_code | @TimPost Then he should be able to justify his decision rather than having a moderator just declare it to us. | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 18:07 | comment | added | user50049 | We have one of the best lawyers in the world (in this field) working on it with us (he teaches this sort of coursework at Fordham). We look at votes to get an idea of how people feel about it. | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 17:53 | history | answered | ghosts_in_the_code | CC BY-SA 3.0 |