Chris wrote:

>> >Unfortunately (for your argument), past behaviour _must_ be examined
>> >in addition to current behavior when trying to figure out what future
>> >behaviour is likely to be.

I wrote:

>> 	So what you're saying is .. you hold grudges.

Ted wrote:

>No, what he's saying 

	Why don't you let Chris speak for himself?

>is that past behaviour can be used to predict
>future behaviour.   

	Only if you assume things are constant.  And things are seldom so.

	But really, we're talking about Chris's copyright here, not OpenBSD.
Except in that Chris's motivations for this copyright is a grudge against
OpenBSD.  Attempting to JUSTIFY that grudge is not helping his (or your)
argument.  And Chris's perpetuation of that grudge is certainly not helping
matters any, as its not going to make OpenBSD come out and say "oh gee,
we're terribly sorry, lets have some tea and crumpets?" But enough of that.

>Why don't you back this up with some evidence?   You can certainly
>make any random claim you want about anything, but you're not really
>engaging in a constructive dialog if all you have to defend your
>arguments is vigourous assertion.

	I have made no random claims.  Just go read the copyright.  That is
my support.  There is more than one way to interpret a legal document, and
we all know that despite Chris's statements in public he has other agendas.
Core's acceptance of his copyright suggests either they believe his
claims, or they agree with his hidden motives, and are willing to accept
the damage it is going to do to relations with, say, FreeBSD's alpha port,
to name an innocent third party which will be negatively affected.

Cheers,
Phil
--
Phillip F Knaack
Systems Administrator, Information Development for Extension Audiences (IDEA)
Iowa State University Extension