[4th Draft] Open Letter to CNRI: Request for clarification

[Will Ware]

You can add my name to the signature list whether or not you take my
suggestions. The later drafts are big improvements, primarily in toning
down the emotional language of the first draft. Here are some thoughts
on this matter. For reference, CNRI's home page is
http://www.cnri.reston.va.us/

1. CNRI legally owns Python, up to version 1.6. You and I don't have
any legal rights of any kind in this matter. The user community does
not collectively have any legal rights in this matter. We are extremely
dependent upon CNRI's good will.

2. CNRI does not need the existing Python user community. But it
sounds like they may have future plans for Python. We don't know what
those plans are, but CNRI would probably benefit from a cooperative
friendly rapport with the user community, given the amount of
expertise floating around out here. CNRI may not yet be aware of the
size and quality of the user community, so they may be inclined to
dismiss the benefits of cooperation.

3. No matter what, we should not alienate or bash CNRI. It's easy to
imagine that every large organization with lawyers is another
Microsoft, but we only hurt ourselves by establishing an atmosphere of
mistrust or suspicion.

4. CNRI may wish to keep secrets, for business reasons or any other
reason, and they are under no obligation to disclose those reasons to
the user community. This is standard business practice throughout the
world. There is nothing to be gained by complaining to them about it.

> We are especially interested in the underlying intention of this
> change. So we request a plain-English, non-legalese statement
> regarding the purpose of that change and the ways in which it
> affects Python's use.

I see what you're looking for here, and agree that if CNRI discloses
(at least partially) their thoughts and plans for Python, it would be
a huge step to establishing a cooperative rapport with the community.
I'm concerned about the phrase "underlying intention", which hints
that you think CNRI is currently being sneaky and hiding something
from the user community. You might want to use a phrase like "overall
intent", or simply "intent".

If CNRI is not yet aware of the benefits of cooperating with the user
community, then the best thing to accomplish with this sort of letter
is to initiate that cooperation yourself.

Remember, you are asking CNRI to do things that they have no legal
obligation or business reason to do. You want to be as polite about
all this as possible. They don't owe you or me or the user community
anything.
-- 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Resistance is futile. Capacitance is efficacious.
Will Ware	email:    wware @ world.std.com