development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons

["David Palmer." <davidpalmer AT westnet.com.au>]

On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 10:10, David Wiley wrote:
> David,
> 
> Can you summarize this message in language accessible to mere mortals 
> like myself? Thanks.
> 
> D
> 
> David Palmer wrote:
> 
> >>As for "what real, normal users want," this is why I have harped
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>on open decision-making processes. I don't think anyone, not even
> >>>>me ;) can claim to be representative of the General Will without
> >>>>some means of determining what that Will may happen to be.
> >>>>
> >>>>-- Stephen
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >This aspect interests me also.
> >In the formation of an aspect of a venture, the stated intention of
> >which is to preserve the invaluable, innovative synergy of the commons,
> >I fail to understand why such little use of that commons is being
> >employed!
> >Or, perhaps I don't.
> >I have noticed in the past that there is a misconception amongst the
> >broader community, and this applies to educators as well, that educators
> >are intellectuals. Whilst with all rules there are exceptions, I find it
> >my sad duty to have to confide that this is rarely the case. Educators
> >are the purveyors of the product of intellectuals, and generally no more
> >than that, and quite often fall short on even that function.
> >On the assumption by educators of the aforementioned misconception,
> >there appears to be a tendency to withdraw into an isolationist,
> >fragmented, staffroom-like lack of environment wherein they indulge in
> >pseudointellectual, pedantic, pyrotechnical, verbal spiralisms in some
> >vain attempt to bolster the said misconception. And, in the process of
> >course, locking out in the corridor that naughty, disruptive element
> >that had the temerity to think outside the square, and therefore
> >probably the most creative element in the situation.
> >How many disparate sociological groups were contacted on the formation
> >of this project, may I ask? (Careful with the answer, you may prove
> >every word I say). The first of many that I would have contacted would
> >have been the representatives of those that saw themselves as the
> >victims of the educational process.
> >As an example of what onesuch could contribute as a concept to be
> >incorporated into what was suggested as an extension to the programme
> >(projects, lesson plans ) how about this:-
> >
> >"How to Learn".
> >
> >As a heading?
> >Very few educators do it. It should be first on the educational agenda
> >in my perception.
> >
> >  
> >
> >>There is some resistance to making education an option on the 
> >>original 'choose your license' page because our goal is to keep the 
> >>license building page as simple as possible. 
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Not just the licence building page, hopefully, but the whole CC project.
> >I think that it is fairly common knowledge now, that the open source
> >software environment is under orchestrated, concerted attack. It is not
> >inconceivable that the GPL may fall victim to the power of amended
> >regulation brought about by the power wielded by commercial lobby groups
> >(If you are unfamiliar with this scenario, I can recommend 'The Future
> >of Ideas' by Lawrence Lessig as an able introduction).
> >And what you may very well be forming here, with Creative Commons, is a
> >next line of defense against corporate encroachment. Please understand
> >the principles that complexity creates vulnerability, and that authority
> >and responsibility are synonymous terminologies.
> >Why not deal with the situation in the spirit of the present superfluous
> >manner, and supply each subgroup with the same licence, but a different
> >coloured logo?
> >
> >  
> >
> >>BUT, I don't think the existence of the Education License would 
> >>necessarily prevent work on a separate, more restrictive 
> >>license. What 
> >>happens next will just depend on what real, normal users want.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >There may be a separate, more restrictive license, but I would
> >vigorously oppose their being branded as Creative Commons
> >licenses./unquote.
> >
> >Ditto.
> >There are enough retentive personalities creating new restrictive
> >licence options. I believe personally that we have a dearth of these to
> >contend with at present, perhaps it might be more beneficial to stay
> >with the task at hand.
> >
> >Hello Heather Ford.
> >Pleased to meet you.
> >For such supposedly cultured personalities, they don't appear to have
> >much in the way of manners, do they?
> >The All Blacks will win the World Cup.
> >Regards to all,
> >
> >David.
> >
Hello,

Well, I've reread the post, and I arrive at a few conclusions:-

it appears to be written in the english language;
my replies appear to be related directly, both physically and mentally
to the relevant quoted sections;
if you have trouble comprehending the fuller context, I fail to see how
a precis/summary will bring enlightenment.

Perhaps if you were to specify which section(s) you are struggling with,
I might be in a better position, with an expanded format, to be able to
assist?
Regards,

David.


A. Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q. Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A. Top-posting.
Q. What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in email?