Create CC0-LICENSE #528
Create CC0-LICENSE #528
Conversation
|
Dear contributors, please agree to using a CC0 public domain license. Pinging those who have contributed above 10 commits (possibly not including everyone that committed to the Wiki, which can't seem to be tracked as easily). (I agree.) @frozeman, @vbuterin, @chriseth, @debris, @pedrosoftz, @LianaHus, @stephantual, @xcthulhu, @shin1hi, @ryoumh, @ghasshee, @heikoheiko, @ethers, @CJentzsch, @LefterisJP, @janx, @Worker-GER, @subtly, @obscuren, @gavofyork, @TOMOAKI12345, @zelig, @tgerring, @btceth, @yann300, @Gustav-Simonsson, @EtherKorea, @jorisbontje, @nagydani, @aeronbuchanan, @arkpar, @qualiabyte, @kurihei, @maurycyp, @ethernomad, @thehighfiveghost. |
|
Also pinging those who made 10 or less commits but made many additions in lines of code (which is actually a better way to sort): @ruchevits, @zaq1tomo, @jesuscript, @cubedro, @AdrienLedoux, @chfast, @utamaro, @ramvi, @phonikg, @benadrasni, @step21. |
|
I agree. |
|
I very much approve of this! (kind of thought it was under creative commons already) |
|
Cool with me |
|
Agreed. |
1 similar comment
|
Agreed. |
|
yes iagree
Create your own email signature
<https://wisestamp.com/email-install?utm_source=promotion&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=create_your_own>
2018-02-16 8:26 GMT+07:00 step21 <notifications@github.com>:
… Agreed.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#528 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AdTzIH5PC7kPcz8_-7zoR9gwJD1yt5cEks5tVNlOgaJpZM4RjK8w>
.
|
|
I agree. |
|
Agreed |
|
I agree. |
|
Agreed |
|
I agree |
1 similar comment
|
I agree |
|
I agree. |
|
16 agreed so far, 47 in total to agree, leaving 31 to agree. Hmm, I could use the git commit log to send one-on-one email follow-ups. I'll wait another week or so. |
|
I agree |
|
To save using the Git commit log to email people (who should've got emails any way), I suggest to merge this, since nobody has objected, and there has been ample opportunity for objections. @pirapira |
|
The majority hasn't replied about CC0. I cannot turn their silence into a license. |
|
Oh come on, it's just two letter swaps! ;-) |
|
I was thinking of the process of rough consensus (as explained in this document: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7282.txt) where you give people an opportunity to make objections, and eliminate them if they can be fixed technically, otherwise if not then the proposal can be rejected and an alternative can be pursued. GIven that there has been ample opportunity for people to object, and none have done so, I thought it would be OK to merge this license. |
|
What is the probability that the estimated judgement is agreement by the about one-third samples with 0% rejection which is selected (answered) from the whole entities ? What kind of distribution should we select for modeling the estimation ? I know there are still problems of the way of broadcasting discussions and this is no-random selection of samples, that the probability I question seems to be very high, and that it is still a dangerous decision with such an estimate which has faults. |
|
Maybe I know that the consensus likely to be high because of the probability generated by 0% rejection. I felt that there seem to be no explanations of the modeling formally. I am afraid I also know my comments are quite trivial :-) |
|
Yeah it's worth the read. There's a few ways to look at it: get rough consensus (no objections that can't be solved), get the majority to approve, or get everyone to approve. I suggest that we use a rough consensus model. If someone lashes out and says: "hey, you didn't get my approval to change the license", then we can say, well we gave you ample opportunity to make an objection, but you didn't, so we chose to assume that it would be OK to merge the license. Otherwise I have to nag people by sending them an email asking them to explicitly state that they approve using a CC0 license. |
|
I think the problem is in the deeper area, So, rough consensus mechanism seems based on the fundamentals of probability and statics, and maybe the people in this community know deeply about it. But they do not have the concrete tool which will adopt rough consensus into the global consensus. |
|
I agree.
2018-03-15 13:23 GMT+08:00 James Ray <notifications@github.com>:
… https://twitter.com/JamesCRay01/status/974153262147358720
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#528 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKHn5s71AUQjpqLQNBVitaa6dJ-bGoXYks5tefrBgaJpZM4RjK8w>
.
|
|
Now I wonder if there is any significant contribution left. Perhaps, it's easier to add the license page-wise. |
|
I've already added it. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/CC0-license However, I thought it would be good to get this merged, as a formality, and to be more legally enforceable. If you see my tweet thread, I have pinged many contributors in descending order of contributions. |
|
@jamesray1 no, I meant to license some of the pages, whose authors have already agreed. |
|
Ah that is so much work to match up all the contributors that have agreed with the articles that they have contributed to. I think I'll pass on that task. |
|
If we can get all or even most of the contributors in that Twitter thread to approve a CC0 license, then I think it should be well and truly OK to merge. |
|
I agree. |
|
I approve changing the license for this Ethereum wiki repository to Creative Commons' CC0 license ("No rights reserved"), putting it in the public domain. |
|
I agree. |
|
I updated the home page and the CC0 license page, adding a contributor license agreement to help enable future changes to be under a CC0 license and referring to this PR to acknowledge those who have and have not agreed to a CC0 license, where those who have not have all rights reserved for their contributions. |
|
I agree. |
|
I approve changing the license for this Ethereum wiki repository to Creative Commons' CC0 license ("No rights reserved"), putting it in the public domain. |
|
I agree. |
|
I approve changing the license for this Ethereum wiki repository to Creative Commons' CC0 license ("No rights reserved"), putting it in the public domain. |
2 similar comments
|
I approve changing the license for this Ethereum wiki repository to Creative Commons' CC0 license ("No rights reserved"), putting it in the public domain. |
|
I approve changing the license for this Ethereum wiki repository to Creative Commons' CC0 license ("No rights reserved"), putting it in the public domain. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ethereum
Create CC0-LICENSE #528
@Briechenstein12
Creating a CC0 license allows for the content of this wiki to be placed in the public domain. This will help to allow for the dissemination of information about Ethereum, the Ethereum ecosystem and Web 3 in a completely permissive manner.
|
I have contributed to Etherscan/Eth lialakyky@gmail.com Etherscan name CustomClassic Github name lialakyky505 |
|
such a fucking and stupid malay, go back and learn your English first. Administrator, pls ban this idiot. |
|
ur computer was hacked? If I were you, don’t use computer again. Hackers only hack idiot’s machine. |
|
I agree with CC0 |
|
Welcome to ETC-land, @ethers! |
Creating a CC0 license allows for the content of this wiki to be placed in the public domain. This will help to allow for the dissemination of information about Ethereum, the Ethereum ecosystem and Web 3 to the public, in a completely permissive manner. I have updated the home page and created a CC0 license page, adding a contributor license agreement to help enable future changes to be under a CC0 license and referring to this PR to acknowledge those who have and have not agreed to a CC0 license, where those who have not agreed to a CC0 license have all rights reserved for their contributions.