Discuss mailing list

[<vv AT cgs.pw>]

Daniel,

Perhaps not "everyone", but rather just me. :)
I apologise for getting hold of the wrong end
of the stick there.

I was really stuck on the "libre" and "free"
thing - neither of which are compatible with
the idea of demanding non-commercial use.
How that could happen in the first place is
pretty crazy to my way of thinking. I honestly
don't see how one could confuse "free" with
the idea of excluding certain people or usages.
That is where I got confused.

So, I now agree with you. If the charter is to
remain the same, then another name is very
important. Your idea of .noncom is very good.
However, using two m's sounds like "communication"
to me, rather than "commercial". That's just
my opinion, for whatever that's worth. :)

For those whose first language is not English,
Spanish, or French, here is why neither libre nor
free is appropriate for that charter:

LIBRE: From French and Spanish libre (“free,
 having liberty, at liberty”).
 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/libre
FREE: having the legal and political rights of
 a citizen; enjoying political independence or
 freedom from outside domination; etc.
 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/free

Regards,
        Ole



On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 15:41:59 -0400 (EDT)
"Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:

> Everyone keeps misunderstanding me. I want to change the
> TLD, not the charter.
> 
> --
> 
> -Dan Q
> 
> 
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:17:38 +0200, Amunak
> <amunak AT amunak.net> wrote:
> 
> > I like this choice also because it's very unlikely that
> > someone might register it with ICANN, as it's not
> > really a word or anything.
> > 
> > 
> > Dne 10.06.2017 v 7:03 kevin napsal(a):  
> > > .faif
> > >
> > > <free as in freedom>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 22:31 -0400, Daniel Quintiliani
> > > wrote:  
> > >> Originally it was about the choice of the TLD .libre
> > >> as a replacement for a noncommercial-only .free,
> > >> when something like .noncom or .noncomm would be
> > >> better suited since "libre" implies both commercial
> > >> and noncommercial use.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >> -Dan Q
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 19:28:24 -0700, <vv AT cgs.pw> wrote:
> > >>  
> > >>> I think the discussion was not about the word,
> > >>> nor choice thereof, but about the appropriateness
> > >>> of the charter.
> > >>>
> > >>> ~ Ole
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:20:21 -0400 (EDT)
> > >>> "Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:
> > >>>  
> > >>>> "libre vs gratis" is used in the free software
> > >>>> movement, as the word "free" in English means both
> > >>>> "free as in freedom" (libre) and "free of
> > >>>> charge" (gratis).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -Dan Q
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:14:14 -0700, rhargrave
> > >>>> <roman AT hargrave.info> wrote:
> > >>>>  
> > >>>>> I'm not up to speed on the .free replacement
> > >>>>> situation, but has anyone suggested the charter
> > >>>>> of an entirely novel domain deriving its name
> > >>>>> from the equivalent to 'free' in another language
> > >>>>> (like .libre)? Perhaps choosing a word from a
> > >>>>> conlang like Esperanto would also eliminate
> > >>>>> disagreements based on locality. The charter
> > >>>>> could be basically identical to .free.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ---- On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:03:21 -0700 vv AT cgs.pw
> > >>>>> wrote ----
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 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  
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --------
> > >>>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > >>>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >>>>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --------
> > >>>>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > >>>>> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >>>>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > >>>>  
> > >>>
> > >>> --------
> > >>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > >>> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --------
> > >> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > >> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > >> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --------
> > > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> > > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> > 
> > 
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing
> > discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org  
> 
>