(urth) Cave Canem back online

[Mo Holkar / UKG]

At 23:52 08/08/2008, Gwern wrote:
>Well, it would handle my objection, yes. But since there is no 
>license in place (or to put it another way, the current license is 
>All Rights Reserved), I would *strongly* recommend *not* using the 
>GFDL. The GFDL has many very bad features which have caused 
>Wikipedia tremendous trouble; Wikipedia's not even using the full 
>GFDL, and we've still invested a lot of effort with Creative Commons 
>and the FSF to get the GFDL updated into something not terrible.
>
>As I said before, I would recommend public-domain/BSD to start off 
>with, for maximum flexibility. And then if contributors wanted to*, 
>use the Creative Commons ShareAlike license (either with or without 
>Attribution, but avoiding NC).
>
>* The primary purpose of using a copyleft license is to prevent 
>people stealing your content and 'closing' it; but honestly, while 
>many people would like to steal and close the Linux kernel, say, I 
>don't really think a small wiki on Wolfeana really needs to worry about that.


I'm pretty ignorant about such matters myself, so very much welcome 
any suggestions from anyone who's interested.

I've created a page on the wiki:
http://www.holkar.net/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Admin.Licence
for discussion of licence matters, rather than clog up this list too much.

(Yes, one does need to sign up to contribute to this page, but anyone 
who'd rather not do so yet can just email me and I'll post up your 
suggestions etc.)

best wishes,

Mo


# ~ # ~ #

WolfeWiki
http://www.holkar.net/pmwiki/