Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Blog
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Allow licence change when there's only one contributor

Parent

Allow licence change when there's only one contributor

+8
−0

I wrote a post without realizing I was using the default licence CC BY-SA instead of the licence I wanted to use (CC0).

I wanted to amend my mistake; I wasn't able to.

Other similar (but closed source) Q&A platforms allow for flash edit. I need licence flash edits!

feature-request discussion license editing-posts
posted about 4 years ago
CC0
user card
.                                                .‭
8 15 32 22
History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (1 comment)
Post
+1
−1

It should be possible for you to fix your mistake by, if nothing else, deleting the post and re-posting it with the correct license. Doing so would effectively dual-license it, under CC-BY-SA and CC0. Since anyone who uses it under CC-BY-SA should also be in compliance with CC0, that shouldn't be a problem.

posted about 4 years ago
user card
Canina‭
70 78 760 152
History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (2 comments)
General comments
.                                                .‭ wrote about 4 years ago
copy link

This implies CCBYSA content cannot be relicensed to CC0, but it fails to link some explanation to such claim.

Derek Elkins‭ wrote about 4 years ago
copy link

@8063 This answer in no way implies, let alone claims, that you can't relicense CC-BY-SA content to CC0. It simply provides a way to achieve your goals today without changes to the software or support from site administrators. In fact, this is arguably how license changes should be handled. Editing a post in place leads to potential confusion as to what license was provided when a post was referenced (via link).