Announcement regarding the F.A.Q.

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

hundreds and hundreds of messages attempting to
harrass and intimidate

Riiiiight. The proponents of payware recommendations were all nice
and polite, and the bad guys were baaaaaad. How could I have
forgotten?

 

[bambam]

I myself was interested in
hearing what commercial programs might be available for the price
of a magazine. Rather than split hairs (please), it was simply
free-enough-for-me-ware.

I thought you were one of the good guys?
We are a group, alt.comp.freeware, "free-enough-for-me-ware" is not
what this group is supposedly about.

 

[Vic Dura]

The basics: (the generic "you")

You have complete control of what you read.
You have complete control in what you post.

That is the end of your complete control. Now you are venturing into
someone elses areas of complete control. You are a visitor here.

Don't complain because you don't like what you're reading <G>. Don't
read it!

Be responsible for what you write. That is, do not attempt to infringe
on someone elses 2 areas of complete control. Be civil. Be tolerant.
Accept the fact this is an unmoderated newsgroup.

Very well and kindly put REMbranded. You have a great ability to
succinctly make a statement. I wish I could do it; then I might not
get so many folks angry at me.

 

[Susan Bugher]

I thought you were one of the good guys?
We are a group, alt.comp.freeware, "free-enough-for-me-ware" is not
what this group is supposedly about.

Hi bambam,

IMO he is most decidedly one of the good guys! Since when does honestly
and openly expressing an opinion make someone a bad guy?

IMO our wrath should be reserved for the guys who come in and try to
*destroy* the furniture: I'll post whatever I like and you can't stop me
- not the people who suggest a different furniture arrangement might be
better.

IMO the more *civil* discussion we have about possible improvements the
better. ACF is not *quite* perfect yet . . .

REMbranded - do a Google search for alt.comp.freeware posts from Sheryl
Canter - the problem as I see it is if you give some people any part of
an inch they will attempt to take *several* country miles . . .

- one small quote:

Since you're mentioning some programs that aren't freeware (including
the PC Magazine password utility that we did), I'll mention the one from
our new company, Permutations Software. We are the former ...
</quote>

IMO a *little* discussion of some wares and *a little bit pregnant* are
equally possible. I came to that conclusion gradually and reluctantly.

JMNSVHO

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http:www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html

 

[REMbranded]

IMO he is most decidedly one of the good guys! Since when does honestly
and openly expressing an opinion make someone a bad guy?

Thank you.

IMO the more *civil* discussion we have about possible improvements the
better. ACF is not *quite* perfect yet . . .

REMbranded - do a Google search for alt.comp.freeware posts from Sheryl
Canter - the problem as I see it is if you give some people any part of
an inch they will attempt to take *several* country miles . . .

Yes, an even more definitive FAQ or charter is necessary. There needs
to be an amendment process also to accommodate for changing
environments, should that ever occur. The basics are here. It is just
a matter of defining what is on topic beforehand and attempting to
stay the course.

The devils in the details. Defining some of these wares is
troublesome. On one hand, it seems a shame to ignore good programs
because the author requsts a postcard from those who use his program.
On the other... where are the limits?

The simplest route is pure freeware.

 

[John Corliss]

Yes, an even more definitive FAQ or charter

TTBOMK The latter is impossible. The charter is what it is. The former
describes my version of the F.A.Q.

is necessary. There needs
to be an amendment process also to accommodate for changing
environments, should that ever occur.

Hmm. You saw how well that worked in this unmoderated group. 80)>

The basics are here. It is just
a matter of defining what is on topic beforehand and attempting to
stay the course.

Exactly what I was trying to do all along, and you saw what that got me.

The devils in the details. Defining some of these wares is
troublesome. On one hand, it seems a shame to ignore good programs
because the author requsts a postcard from those who use his program.
On the other... where are the limits?

To the best of my abilities, I attempted to determine what those
limits (regarding on topic and off topic) are in my version of the
F.A.Q. I did this by encouraging discussion and taking votes. Once
they were determined, it became an ongoing task to freeze them in place.

Flexible limitations are pure nonsense. They aren't limitations at all.

As a result and because I defended those limits once they were
determined, I became a target for people like Andy Mabbett and the
Mavis Chillum troll.

The simplest route is pure freeware.

REMbranded,
Always has been, but as you said it's a shame to ignore things like
postcardware.

As per my recent posts, I've come to the conclusion that having an
F.A.Q. for this group is simply a waste of time. Anarchy rules here,
and that's just a fact of life. If you don't believe me, come up with
an F.A.Q. and attempt to defend it. You'll quickly learn that doing so
takes an enormous amount of energy and a thick skin. And an undefended
F.A.Q. is as worthless as the "magnetic ink" used to write it.

People making requests should provide a limitations inclusion like
this:
__________________________________
No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware, demoware,
nagware, shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses
or warez please.
__________________________________

or use a sort of passive voice like this:
__________________________________
true freeware, postcardware, orphanware, careware, registerware, true
liteware only please.
__________________________________

(the latter is bound to result in being recommended more types of
software that you don't want.)

If newbies didn't know about this convention, they'd soon pick it up
if they were determined enough and after repeatedly getting offered
crap like adware, nagware, time-limited betaware, etc.

Hey, if Vic Dura want to get offers of cdware only available with the
purchase of a magazine, that's his business and he could say that
he'll accept it in *his* inclusion.

 

[Susan Bugher]

Yes, an even more definitive FAQ or charter is necessary. There needs
to be an amendment process also to accommodate for changing
environments, should that ever occur. The basics are here. It is just
a matter of defining what is on topic beforehand and attempting to
stay the course.

The devils in the details. Defining some of these wares is
troublesome. On one hand, it seems a shame to ignore good programs
because the author requsts a postcard from those who use his program.
On the other... where are the limits?

re: CDware - I'd like to find a way to accomodate the people who are
interested in it (I'm not).

Perhaps something like the anti-virus announcements (loathed by some).
Label a post [CDware] [OT] - no discussion - but I *fear* this might be
perceived as a toe-in-the-door and lead to undesireable consequences.

Wish I had a sure-fire solution for this kind of problem - as you said,
the devil is in the details.

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http:www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html

 

[REMbranded]

John Corliss <[email protected]#> wrote:

(e-mail address removed) wrote:

TTBOMK The latter is impossible. The charter is what it is. The former
describes my version of the F.A.Q.

I must admit a strange sense of deja vu. I think that it can work
though. Let's see how the interest pans out. If it is here, we'll try
another step.

Hmm. You saw how well that worked in this unmoderated group. 80)>

I think the moderated group the superior tool. I see how difficult it
is to nail things down and ponder what other wares might appear in the
future.

Exactly what I was trying to do all along, and you saw what that got me.

Yes, deja vu again. I'm starting to feel like a dim witted floor

To the best of my abilities, I attempted to determine what those
limits (regarding on topic and off topic) are in my version of the
F.A.Q. I did this by encouraging discussion and taking votes. Once
they were determined, it became an ongoing task to freeze them in place.

Flexible limitations are pure nonsense. They aren't limitations at all.

True, and true again.

As a result and because I defended those limits once they were
determined, I became a target for people like Andy Mabbett and the
Mavis Chillum troll.

Ah, a real benefit of a moderated group appears! There won't be any of
that sort of a thing.

REMbranded,
Always has been, but as you said it's a shame to ignore things like
postcardware.

But where is the edge?

As per my recent posts, I've come to the conclusion that having an
F.A.Q. for this group is simply a waste of time. Anarchy rules here,
and that's just a fact of life. If you don't believe me, come up with
an F.A.Q. and attempt to defend it. You'll quickly learn that doing so
takes an enormous amount of energy and a thick skin. And an undefended
F.A.Q. is as worthless as the "magnetic ink" used to write it.

People making requests should provide a limitations inclusion like
this:
__________________________________
No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware, demoware,
nagware, shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses
or warez please.
__________________________________

This sounds like the basics. Postcardware? I dunno.

or use a sort of passive voice like this:
__________________________________
true freeware, postcardware, orphanware, careware, registerware, true
liteware only please.
__________________________________

I was thinking of staying as true as possible; a place for true
freeware that is defensible.

(the latter is bound to result in being recommended more types of
software that you don't want.)

If newbies didn't know about this convention, they'd soon pick it up
if they were determined enough and after repeatedly getting offered
crap like adware, nagware, time-limited betaware, etc.

Hey, if Vic Dura want to get offers of cdware only available with the
purchase of a magazine, that's his business and he could say that
he'll accept it in *his* inclusion.

Anyone else have any thoughts?

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

This sounds like the basics. Postcardware? I dunno.

Don't forget there are two kinds of postcardware - the author can
either demand or request a postcard.

 

[BillR]

I thought you were one of the good guys?

[but since you disagree with me you're not, so you're a bad guy.]

Part of the attitude that makes this newgroup so unnecessarily
contentious. By any measure I can derive, he is a particularly
productive member of this group. He even manages to remain civil
despite provocation.

The single best service a moderator of this group could serve would be
to censure all posts that are uncivil. (Actually bambam's comment is
not so bad. It is just so undeserved.)

 

[Mister Charlie]

The devils in the details. Defining some of these wares is
troublesome. On one hand, it seems a shame to ignore good programs
because the author requsts a postcard from those who use his program.
On the other... where are the limits?

The simplest route is pure freeware.

Though I have little to offer the group but my malformed opinions, I
highly disagree here. Most postcardware is unconditional. They request
it but obviously do not enforce it. And it is the most benign of
'costs'. Ths is where the hairsplitting gets to severe IMHO. Too many
good programs get left behind for something that truly has no ocst if
the user decides not to 'pay' it.

 

[John Corliss]

Though I have little to offer the group but my malformed opinions, I
highly disagree here. Most postcardware is unconditional. They request
it but obviously do not enforce it. And it is the most benign of
'costs'. Ths is where the hairsplitting gets to severe IMHO. Too many
good programs get left behind for something that truly has no ocst if
the user decides not to 'pay' it.

Mister Charlie,
Nobody ever said that postcardware is off topic in this group. Just
that it isn't freeware in the strictest sense of the word. Not really
a big deal if you think about it.

 

[stan]

there is allot of freeware out there that say stuff like,
feel free to donate to help me continue my work on this and
other future products, etc....just like postcard ware,
its mostly optional, I still consider it pure freeware. if you
feel a guilt trip by using it just remember that it is an
option.. and not compulsory...

JC what about freeware that optionally want some user feedback,
is this pure freeware, it takes you "time" to do it, and time is money,
for most ,so if any freeware suggests feedback its not pure freeware
they want something from you?...

regards
stan

 

[John Corliss]

there is allot of freeware out there that say stuff like,
feel free to donate to help me continue my work on this and
other future products, etc....just like postcard ware,
its mostly optional, I still consider it pure freeware. if you
feel a guilt trip by using it just remember that it is an
option.. and not compulsory...

JC what about freeware that optionally want some user feedback,
is this pure freeware, it takes you "time" to do it, and time is money,
for most ,so if any freeware suggests feedback its not pure freeware
they want something from you?...

Sounds like freeware to me, if the feedback (or any other cost) is
optional. Good point.

 

[REMbranded]

Sounds like freeware to me, if the feedback (or any other cost) is
optional. Good point.

"Optional" might provide for a working definition to base "pure" on.

That will include requestwares, requests for donations, support, etc.
Anything that asks something of the user that is not optional resides
on the other side of the fence.




------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
Want to have instant messaging, and chat rooms, and discussion
groups for your local users or business, you need dbabble!
-- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dbabble.htm ----

 

[Mister Charlie]

Mister Charlie,
Nobody ever said that postcardware is off topic in this group. Just
that it isn't freeware in the strictest sense of the word. Not really
a big deal if you think about it.

I realize in rereading my post I should have said not conditional, not
unconditional.

Glad postcardware is not being lumped in with spyware, adware or worse.

 

[peter j. (biff) xemblonsky]

fizzle pop Sun, 02 Nov 2003 14:44:34 -0800, whir sput ssssput John
judging by your .sig, i'd say he completely owns you.

 

[bambam]

(e-mail address removed) (BillR) wrote in

(e-mail address removed) wrote in


I thought you were one of the good guys?

[but since you disagree with me you're not, so you're a bad guy.]

I didn't make the rules, it's not me he is disagreeing with, it's the
group.

Part of the attitude that makes this newgroup so unnecessarily
contentious. By any measure I can derive, he is a particularly
productive member of this group. He even manages to remain civil
despite provocation.

REMbranded is indeed a very productive member of this group, one of
the best. This is why I was so surprised at his support for the
posting of commercial programs provided for the price of a magazine.

The single best service a moderator of this group could serve
would be to censure all posts that are uncivil. (Actually
bambam's comment is not so bad. It is just so undeserved.)

Why is it undeserved? Are questions not allowed to be asked of
"productive members"?
We aren't moderated yet.

 

[bambam]

Hi bambam,

Hi Susan,

IMO he is most decidedly one of the good guys! Since when does
honestly and openly expressing an opinion make someone a bad guy?

I've given this some thought and decided to try and explain why I
still stand by my statement.
CDWare is one of the hardest to categorise.
On one hand it can be freeware and on topic, eg - if Open Office is
included on the latest Australian PC User magazine CD, then mention
of this is IMO perfectly OK, because whether or not you have access
to the CD you can gain access to Open Office.
On the other hand it can be both off topic and bloody annoying, eg -
if Paragon Partition Manager is included on the latest Australian PC
User magazine CD, then mention of this is IMO definitely not OK,
because only people who have access to, and pay for, the above
magazine can take up the "special" free offer.
Hence my statement above after REMBranded,s "free-enough-for-me-ware"
statement.

IMO our wrath should be reserved for the guys who come in and try
to *destroy* the furniture: I'll post whatever I like and you
can't stop me - not the people who suggest a different furniture
arrangement might be better.

Wrath? In my dictionary it says "extreme anger". Did you think my
post was extremely angry?

IMO the more *civil* discussion we have about possible
improvements the better. ACF is not *quite* perfect yet . . .

I agree. ;o)

 

[REMbranded]

bambam <[email protected]> wrote:

I've given this some thought and decided to try and explain why I
still stand by my statement.

CDWare is one of the hardest to categorise.
On one hand it can be freeware and on topic, eg - if Open Office is
included on the latest Australian PC User magazine CD, then mention
of this is IMO perfectly OK, because whether or not you have access
to the CD you can gain access to Open Office.
On the other hand it can be both off topic and bloody annoying, eg -
if Paragon Partition Manager is included on the latest Australian PC
User magazine CD, then mention of this is IMO definitely not OK,
because only people who have access to, and pay for, the above
magazine can take up the "special" free offer.
Hence my statement above after REMBranded,s "free-enough-for-me-ware"
statement.

You are right. I was OT on this one. I really wasn't trying to make
waves with my statement. I just tried explaining my feelings at the
time.

That was the first time I had heard of a program of the PSP caliber
being available with a magazine. I did search locally and saw nothing
like this here in Nac. If I had, this is something I would have told
my friends about. In short, although OT, it was newsworthy to me.
I appreciated becoming aware of the possibility even though it did not
apply to me and was OT.

There were rumors of a URL to download going around about that time
and it wasn't a clear cut case of being OT. After the fact, they were
cracks, warez or 404's that had been one or the other previously.

Also about that time it "appeared" that Norton System Works 2000 was
free for the asking. "Wow! A software revolution!" was my thought. I
couldn't understand the fierce resistance to the mention of it. Two
really presigious softwares going for free? C'mon. I doubt any group
stays on topic all of the time, surely these are worth mention.

I'm not sure what this was. I read it was a disgruntled employee that
made a private partner URL publically available somewhere. It might
have been a simple oversight, I dunno. I signed up and of course never
received the software.

Anyway, this has led to discussion about a moderated group. The idea
is to provide a very focused group with a very high signal/noise
ratio. I'd be interested to hear your view on that thread.

In an unmoderated group this is simply not possible. Regardless of
where you stand others can (and will) differ. A majority vote is not
enough, unfortunately, in an unmoderated group. It will work in a
moderated one though.

A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory

<G>

------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
Do your users want the best web-email gateway? Don't let your
customers drift off to free webmail services install your own
web gateway!
-- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_webmail.htm ----