Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8922875" data-attributes="member: 7023840">To be clear, they said that they are not doing what they said they were going to do. That's what everyone wanted.Also to be clear, they previously said (way back when) that you could always rely on it. For complicated legal reasons, that statement then was just as valid as any statement they make now. So even if they did, in some sort of, oh, FAQ or something,* the &quot;people who could not be pleased&quot; would just say that you couldn't trust them- because they did it before. The only way to undo the method they used would be ... to release a new license! Which wouldn't solve the underlying problem regarding the issues with the drafting of the OGL 1.0(a).So there are, in fact, conspicuous legal reasons that not only did the community get half a loaf, they got a loaf and a half.Just to be clear.But if you would like to be more clear to me, explain to me exactly how, legally, they were supposed to &quot;backdown&quot; even further. Feel free to explain it using any complicated terms that are necessary to make your point. To be 100% clear. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> *See what I did there?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8922875, member: 7023840"] To be clear, they said that they are not doing what they said they were going to do. [I]That's what everyone wanted[/I]. Also to be clear, they previously said (way back when) that you could always rely on it. For complicated [I]legal[/I] reasons, that statement then was just as valid as any statement they make now. So even if they did, in some sort of, oh, FAQ or something,* the "people who could not be pleased" would just say that you couldn't trust them- because they did it before. The only way to undo the method they used would be ... to release a new license! Which wouldn't solve the underlying problem regarding the issues with the drafting of the OGL 1.0(a). So there are, in fact, [I]conspicuous[/I] legal reasons that not only did the community get half a loaf, they got a loaf and a half. [I][B]Just to be clear[/B][/I]. But if you would like to be more clear to me, explain to me exactly how, legally, they were supposed to "backdown" even further. Feel free to explain it using any complicated terms that are necessary to make your point. To be 100% clear. :) *See what I did there? [/QUOTE]

Verification