Subject: Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 163

From: Chris Down <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:35:31 +0000

On 26/02/2009 22:33, [email-masked] wrote:
> Once you change this to "Experience Space for Logged-on Entities in Persistent Viewing Zones with Transmissable Data" you are well on the way to -- well, some sort of ism or another, perhaps communism, perhaps Extropianism.

This list is not a platform for your extreme political views. A lot of
emails you send infer that anyone or anything that opposes your views
are communist. This sort of rhetoric does nothing to help establish the
MMOX standards. It is an annoying distraction and in fact it puts people
off getting involved.

This is not bait for you to call me a communist, because I assure you I
am not. It is a suggestion that you avoid "politicalisms" and put
forward your suggestions in a logical manner and thenm people would take
notice of them.

Regards
Chris Down

---

From: Jon Watte <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:40:24 -0800

Chris Down wrote:
>> Once you change this to "Experience Space for Logged-on Entities in 
>> Persistent Viewing Zones with Transmissable Data" you are well on the 
>> way to -- well, some sort of ism or another, perhaps communism, 
>> perhaps Extropianism.
>

Please keep this civil. There is no need to call anyone's views 
"extreme," because, to the person in question, those views are correct, 
and other views are extreme.

This list is not a platform for anyone's political views.

This list is for defining a vendor neutral wire protocol to enable 
interoperability between virtual worlds. Because different virtual 
worlds have different approaches to IP protection, such a standard will 
necessarily have to support both the use case where the originating 
world *requires* strong DRM, and the use case where the originating 
world *requires* copyleft. Trying to interoperate between those two 
worlds wouldn't actually work out in the end, of course, unless there 
was an alternate middle ground substitution available somewhere. But, 
technically, I think we've already acknowledged the feasibility and 
requirement, so any more discussion on specific opinions about one or 
the other, or opinions about opinions, seem to be off topic.

Sincerely,

jw