development of an education license or license option for Creative Commons

[David Wiley <dw2 AT opencontent.org>]

Everyone,

I've been contacted offlist by someone who is confused about what is 
happening with the current "vote." Lest the wrong expectations be set 
up, I want to reiterate what we are doing and why we are currently 
holding a vote.

The process CC has established (as applies to the current discussion) is 
as follows: Project lead creates draft, Public discussion group provides 
feedback, Project lead creates second draft. This is the CC license 
development process.

The purpose of the current vote is not to determine whether or not we 
should move forward with the license draft process. As I indicated in my 
last letter, the discussion group is not empowered to make this 
decision. The current vote is not about whether or not to have a CC 
Education License.

The purpose of the current vote is not to *determine* the contents of 
the second draft. The discussion group is not empowered to make this 
decision either. The discussion group is empowered to provide feedback 
on the first draft which the project lead takes into account when 
writing the second draft.

The purpose of the current vote *is* to help the project lead determine 
what everyone's most current thinking is regarding the various license 
clauses and options we have been discussing for the last eight months. 
The purpose of the current vote is to make sure that the project lead 
has the best data available when s/he creates the second draft.

Will the language of the second draft reflect exactly the outcome of the 
discussion group's voting? Probably not. The purpose of the vote is to 
*inform* the final decision. The purpose of the vote is not to *make* 
the final decision. Under the CC process, the group is not empowered to 
make the final decision.

I hope this clarifies what we are currently doing.

If you have any other questions regarding how the process works, please 
forward them on to me. If you have criticism of the process or 
suggestions about how you feel the process *should* work, please do not 
send them to me or to the list. Neither I nor the list are empowered to 
do anything about the process. Please send these comments somewhere 
else, lest they appear to be (and very actually be) pointless complaining.

I join Zachary in commending CC for involving all willing participants 
in the process at all. Despite previous comments to the contrary, this 
extra time, effort, and pain shows that CC wants to go the extra mile 
and involve the community in every license project they undertake.

D