Re: Alternative Walnut Creek letter

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Dave Schweisguth: "Re: PGP Message Signatures on FAQs"
• Previous message: Zefram: "Re: PGP Message Signatures on FAQs"
• Maybe in reply to: Ian Jackson: "Alternative Walnut Creek letter"
• Next in thread: Tomas Willis: "Re: Alternative Walnut Creek letter"
• Reply: Tomas Willis: "Re: Alternative Walnut Creek letter"

I agree with the sentiment which lead to the development of the alternative
letter, but the draft leaves open all the legal questions that we've already
had to suffer discussion of.

Rather than have this subsdide into a miasma of legal nitpicking, why not
send a second, very simple, letter stating clearly that the signatories have
not objection to what WC are doing, and leave it at that. No need to discuss
motifations (which differ between authors anyway).

Slainte
Gordon

--
Gordon Findlay,  Computer Scientist, Christchurch School of Medicine
                 Nuclear-free New Zealand       !It's not that there are too 
Email:  Gordon@CHMEDS.AC.NZ                     !many fools: it's just that 
Paper:  PO Box 4345, Christchurch,  NEW ZEALAND !the lightning is badly 
Voice:  +64-3-364 0540                          !distributed (Mark Twain)

• Next message: Dave Schweisguth: "Re: PGP Message Signatures on FAQs"
• Previous message: Zefram: "Re: PGP Message Signatures on FAQs"
• Maybe in reply to: Ian Jackson: "Alternative Walnut Creek letter"
• Next in thread: Tomas Willis: "Re: Alternative Walnut Creek letter"
• Reply: Tomas Willis: "Re: Alternative Walnut Creek letter"

[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]