I desire attribution for my contributions. WTFPL, at least, seems to suggest that I would be OK with people plagiarizing, which I am not. Copyright should be abolished, of course, but I don't want to
encourage people to take my work without attribution.
There are probably legal problems with it. Compare it with the similar CC0 license:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcodeOne sentence is not going to cover all of the legal issues. Potentially someone could sue
us for using our own stuff.
WTFPL is less restrictive than CC-A, so legally copying material from the Bitcoin wiki would require you to get permission from
all page authors.
I prefer CC-A -- including a link back to the page is not a huge legal burden, and it clearly indicates that plagiarism is not acceptable. No one's going to sue anyone, anyway. I wouldn't mind CC0 or any of the more restrictive CC licenses.
CC-by makes sense for many people, I see how this can be interesting.
The intention of WTFPL is to show that you don't care a shit about copyright laws. At least that's my interpretation.
I don't even care about attribution. That why I asked MT to use WTFPL rather than anything else.
I guess you won't care if we thank you for your work. Anyway this whole license issue is a problem to copy content from the current wiki, so I believe the switch to CC-by-3.0 is pretty much obvious. If anyone has an objection, please state it here.