Discuss mailing list

[<vv AT cgs.pw>]

I think your points are good, and look forward to
some discussion about that. Commercial usage can
sometimes be a problem in some environments, but
I honestly don't think that's going to happen here.
In fact I think we should be so lucky as to have
commercial interest in our world. It might be good
for us.

That said, the basic ideas of liberty and freedom
are not compatible with such harsh censorship as
espoused by the .libre charter. In fact I think it
is very wrong and certainly deceptive - I hope not
deliberately so.

Regards,
        Ole Juul


On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 20:18:17 -0400 (EDT)
"Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I really think we need to reopen the choice of the .libre
> domain to replace .free.
> 
> The reason being that the charter for .libre forbids
> commercial use while every use of .libre (FLOSS) means
> "free as in freedom" including the freedom for commercial
> use. Therefore .libre is misleading. .libre is closer
> to .oss than it is to .free.
> 
> During the vote I suggested merging into .null, but it
> was during the voting thread, there was no discussion,
> and my vote to merge into .null wound up being the only
> vote to do so. Also, .null is intended for individuals,
> not organizations, so that was a bad idea anyway.
> 
> While it's still soon enough, I think we should cancel
> the .libre domains and switch them to something like:
> 
> .noncom
> .noncomm
> 
> or the like.
> 
> I propose .noncom
> 
> Does anyone agree with me on .libre being a bad idea, and
> that we should rename it ASAP?
> 
> --
> 
> -Dan Q