?
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Omar=A9?=
Susan said:
Susan my vote is to move.
Best regards
Omar
Susan my vote is to move.
Best regards
Omar
M
Mister Charlie
Kerry.
Oh, um, er.......move.
Oh, um, er.......move.
B
Ben A Gozar
Move
The last move and design change was a big improvement imo, I fail to see
how a redesign will be less than equal.
The last move and design change was a big improvement imo, I fail to see
how a redesign will be less than equal.
S
Susan Bugher
jason said:
The *question* is: should the Pricelessware List move to a new web site.
*Information* is being suppressed - of necessity. Much of the discussion
was private. I did not choose the email venue - my preference was (as
always) an open discussion in the newsgroup.
I plead guilty to strong convictions - I *am* always saying things
should be discussed in ACF and *decided* by newsgroup participants. I do
believe the group should have *all* the information.
That said - I believe your comment about suppressing *discussion* refers
to this statement:
"I do not intend to discuss what happened, why it happened, who was to
blame etc. etc. etc. Such a discussion won't change the bottom line."
The past is past - that discussion is over - and it is under a seal of
privacy. . .
I see no *way* to discuss the past. . .
I see no *point* in discussing the past. . .
That's the way it looks from where I'm sitting.
Susan
W
Won Dampchin
Susan Bugher wrote:
....[clipped]...
I can't think of anyone who can compare with Susan's efforts in supporting
and empowering so many in their computer-related needs, desires, and
experiences - and all this without recompense. I, for one, find it a most
welcome opportunity to now offer support by voting for Susan to move to a
place in which she can comfortably continue her most welcome and valuable
work.
Many thanks Susan...Bon Voyage! Keep in touch!
....[clipped]...
....[clipped]...
I can't think of anyone who can compare with Susan's efforts in supporting
and empowering so many in their computer-related needs, desires, and
experiences - and all this without recompense. I, for one, find it a most
welcome opportunity to now offer support by voting for Susan to move to a
place in which she can comfortably continue her most welcome and valuable
work.
Many thanks Susan...Bon Voyage! Keep in touch!
S
Susan Bugher
n said:
ATM less than 10 MB - that's based on the sum of the file sizes on my
computer
I don't know.
HTH a little
Susan
R
Roger Johansson
Semolina said:
Well said.
I think the problems between Genna and Susan should be cleared out in
public, that is the right way to handle it, but if that is not possible
I have to support Susans wish to move because of the excellent way she
takes care of the PL web site.
I would welcome a clarification from Genna of what has happened though.
I am very puzzled by this, and curious.
It takes two to tango.
R
REM
As others have pointed out there is something "mysterious" about
discussing an issue in which the details are confidential.
The reason the details are confidential is that they occurred in email
and you consider this a "confidential" medium as I understand it. It
is as simple as that isn't it? No conspiracies? Nothing more than the
subject header suggests?
As the powerhouse of the Pricelessware List (you, that is) since I
began reading this group my vote is to move, as that is what you
request to continue doing the outstanding work that you do.
I really haven't been very involved in the PL list in the past. On
each occasion that you and I have interacted via email to set up a
link, track down a program, or whatever, you have been extremely
friendly, professional, and have made any PL changes immediately.
All of this... as a volunteer. Outstanding. I'm awed.
As I offered in email, I can offer a host site also. There are no
personal files or email or anything confidential there; just some
freeware files for download. There is plenty of spare bandwidth.
Excellent. Don't plan on packing any bags soon though (I hope).
If you need a site with free rein as webmaster/project manager in
order to be your happily efficient self I vote to move.
I'm sure that most of us at some point has been in a working
environment that requires a major change. I've had three jobs over the
years, and in leaving each one it seemed like my little world was
dangling. I've been all the better with each move, however, and the
details about what created the need for each change are all moot.
J
Jack D. Russell, Sr.
======================================================================
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <[email protected]>
* Newsgroup: alt.comp.freeware
* Reply to: All; "Susan Bugher" <[email protected]>
* Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 00:42:08 -0400
* Subj: Re: Irreconcilable Differences
======================================================================
SB> The *question* is: should the Pricelessware List move to a new
web
SB> site.
No.
SB> *Information* is being suppressed - of necessity. Much of the
SB> discussion was private. I did not choose the email venue - my
SB> preference was (as always) an open discussion in the newsgroup.
SB> I plead guilty to strong convictions - I *am* always saying
SB> things should be discussed in ACF and *decided* by newsgroup
SB> participants. I do believe the group should have *all* the
SB> information.
*???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????*
SB> That said - I believe your comment about suppressing *discussion*
SB> refers to this statement:
SB> "I do not intend to discuss what happened, why it happened, who
SB> was to blame etc. etc. etc. Such a discussion won't change the
SB> bottom line."
SB> The past is past - that discussion is over - and it is under a
SB> seal of privacy. . .
SB> I see no *way* to discuss the past. . .
SB> I see no *point* in discussing the past. . .
*Those Who Ignore The Past Are Doomed To Repeat It.*
Stay.
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <[email protected]>
* Newsgroup: alt.comp.freeware
* Reply to: All; "Susan Bugher" <[email protected]>
* Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 00:42:08 -0400
* Subj: Re: Irreconcilable Differences
======================================================================
SB> The *question* is: should the Pricelessware List move to a new
web
SB> site.
No.
SB> *Information* is being suppressed - of necessity. Much of the
SB> discussion was private. I did not choose the email venue - my
SB> preference was (as always) an open discussion in the newsgroup.
SB> I plead guilty to strong convictions - I *am* always saying
SB> things should be discussed in ACF and *decided* by newsgroup
SB> participants. I do believe the group should have *all* the
SB> information.
*???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????*
SB> That said - I believe your comment about suppressing *discussion*
SB> refers to this statement:
SB> "I do not intend to discuss what happened, why it happened, who
SB> was to blame etc. etc. etc. Such a discussion won't change the
SB> bottom line."
SB> The past is past - that discussion is over - and it is under a
SB> seal of privacy. . .
SB> I see no *way* to discuss the past. . .
SB> I see no *point* in discussing the past. . .
*Those Who Ignore The Past Are Doomed To Repeat It.*
Stay.
N
Night2000
From the very beginning, you could see this coming. Genna has been
absent from this group for so long. Many have forgotten her, and have
no loyalty. There would be no Pricelessware if it weren't for her, and
SOS. Thank you Genna, for paying out of your own pocket, and hosting
the Pricelessware list for us all these years.
G
Genna Reeney
This situation is surreal.
I would not say that we have communicated.
I have addressed all of your questions.
You have continued to ask questions, demanding answers under the threat of
shutting down e-mail exchanges, yet you have neither acknowledged my
responses nor answered my own requests for clarification as to the nature of
the problem.
You have not given one example of how the current arrangement was not
working.
You have not articulated a logical rationale for the need of a move to a new
server.
That last sentence is indeed the problem.
You are not interested in making anything work.
Furthermore, you are giving the impression that I am the one who is being
intransigent when you are the one who has refused to discuss anything openly
and rationally.
You are correct in one respect. "Because I want it" is likely to get it for
you, but I will NOT let you do it at my expense, by continuously and
willfully misrepresenting the situation and calling my ethics into question.
It is rather a shame than in asking the members of this group to make a
decision, you are unwilling to inform them as to the facts of the case.
Could it be perhaps because the facts alone do not substantiate the claim?
Isn't it ironic though? You misrepresent the facts to the newsgroup, not
once but several times, yet ask them to take on faith the need for a move to
a different server. I state both publicly and privately that I have no
intention of taking over for you, yet my word is not sufficient for you.
At least this is honest.
Pity that you could not have had the courtesy of stating your primary goal
to me as clearly as you have here.
Pity that you could not have had the courtesy of not disguising your true
goal under a misrepresentation of unethical behavior on my part.
The PL was hosted only on two sites prior to its current home.
It was originally on SOS's site and when that became unavailable at one
point, I hosted it with the understanding that any time SOS wanted it back,
he only had to ask.
Moving the PL to the current site was done in order to have a permanent,
dedicated home for the PL.
Why a move is necessary and what issues will be resolved by moving the site
are points that have not yet been addressed.
Susan, this is a self-serving statement that smacks of bad faith.
The group would NOT be in the position it is now if you had not overreacted.
Period.
The group would NOT be in the position it is now if you had discussed
matters in good faith. Period.
This is self-created drama at its best.
You gambled that I would not respond in the newsgroup after the first post
you made. And as I have said to you, the irony is that had you not so
willfully and consistently misrepresented the facts and called my ethics
into question, I probably would not have responded.
You have now twice abruptly terminated email conversations by turning to the
group, without giving the group the benefit of all the facts. That is
deceitful.
Finally, your statement again is implying that I am somehow abusing the
trust placed in me. You have yet to give any evidence of this, despite
repeated requests on my part.
While this accurate, it is also misleading.
It would have been more correct to state that in lieu of a response to my
questions about the specific needs for a move, you have posted this thread
requesting said move. The manner of your post would tend to suggest that you
have tried everything to resolve the situation while I have been
unreasonable.
The reality is actually quite the opposite.
As with her first post to this newsgroup, Susan has willfully and
continuously misrepresented the facts.
The title of this thread alone is indicative of the situation. Susan has yet
to specify what the issues are that necessitate a move to a new site.
Insofar as she has not done so, how could we have any differences, let alone
irreconcilable ones?
Prior to this situation, there had been no issue. Not once has Susan ever
commented on any problems or expressed a desire, let alone a need, to have
anything structured any differently than it has been up until now. The only
logical conclusion is that it was the email in which I mentioned a move to a
database that has so affected Susan.
As has already been posted elsewhere, the database project was nothing new.
For all Susan's protestations in the initial thread on this subject, this
was not new information to her either.
Furthermore, it might be worthwhile noting that it was Susan herself who
indicated to me earlier this year that the PL might not be long in her
future. This fact she has neglected to bring up to the group, but it is
quite significant in the chain of events. It was precisely because of that
statement that the concept of the database was revived. Susan herself
acknowledges in this thread that a list that can be "easily maintained or
prepared by others" is the way to go.
The initial incident was a grossly overblown miscommunication that could
have been and should have been settled privately in a matter of a couple of
e-mail exchanges. Instead of simply addressing the issues, Susan became
increasingly irrational and posted here under false pretenses, declaring
that there was an urgent and immediate need to move the site. None of her
claims to urgency have been sustained in reality. What indeed was the
pressing and urgent need that sent this newsgroup into a frenzy a few weeks
back?
I take issue with Susan's insinuation that I have been inflexible, making a
power grab or any other such nonsense. That is just simply not true and not
an accurate representation of the facts. I have repeatedly asked Susan what
it is that she wants and have yet to receive a response. I have asked very
directed questions, including whether it was my involvement alone to which
she objected, yet have received no response. There has been no articulated
rationale for the need to move the site elsewhere.
What is perhaps much more telling is that when I expressed my belief that
the PL was a collaborative process and that I had never viewed it as a Power
issue, I was told that I should. That statement should give the members of
the newsgroup pause.
If there is a question as to who is really flexing muscle here, I would like
to point to these 2 statements:
"I do not intend to discuss what happened, why it happened, who was to blame
etc. etc. etc. Such a discussion won't change the bottom line. I would like
to move the Pricelessware List to a new location."
"I see no *point* in discussing the past. . ."
What is truly sad here is that I have always championed Susan from the
start. Whenever I had a difference of opinion with her, I addressed it to
her in private as not to undermine her. I have posted my opinion on a couple
of separate occasions, but never have I pressed my point nor left the
newsgroup in a huff as has been suggested. But I find myself now in the
bewildering position of having to explain away motivations I do not have.
There is no doubt that Susan has done a tremendous amount of work for the
PL. While her claims about always discussing and resolving matters in the
newsgroup are disingenuous, I don't think there are many who could or would
find fault with her efforts. But Susan's actions of the past few weeks leave
me with a great uneasiness. The members of this newsgroup should think long
and hard whether someone who is so inflexible, so closed-minded, so
manipulative, so deceitful is really the best person to represent the values
of the PL.
I have forwarded to SOS the necessary information that will remove the need
for my own future involvement.
Susan said:
I would not say that we have communicated.
I have addressed all of your questions.
You have continued to ask questions, demanding answers under the threat of
shutting down e-mail exchanges, yet you have neither acknowledged my
responses nor answered my own requests for clarification as to the nature of
the problem.
You have not given one example of how the current arrangement was not
working.
You have not articulated a logical rationale for the need of a move to a new
server.
That last sentence is indeed the problem.
You are not interested in making anything work.
Furthermore, you are giving the impression that I am the one who is being
intransigent when you are the one who has refused to discuss anything openly
and rationally.
You are correct in one respect. "Because I want it" is likely to get it for
you, but I will NOT let you do it at my expense, by continuously and
willfully misrepresenting the situation and calling my ethics into question.
It is rather a shame than in asking the members of this group to make a
decision, you are unwilling to inform them as to the facts of the case.
Could it be perhaps because the facts alone do not substantiate the claim?
Isn't it ironic though? You misrepresent the facts to the newsgroup, not
once but several times, yet ask them to take on faith the need for a move to
a different server. I state both publicly and privately that I have no
intention of taking over for you, yet my word is not sufficient for you.
At least this is honest.
Pity that you could not have had the courtesy of stating your primary goal
to me as clearly as you have here.
Pity that you could not have had the courtesy of not disguising your true
goal under a misrepresentation of unethical behavior on my part.
The PL was hosted only on two sites prior to its current home.
It was originally on SOS's site and when that became unavailable at one
point, I hosted it with the understanding that any time SOS wanted it back,
he only had to ask.
Moving the PL to the current site was done in order to have a permanent,
dedicated home for the PL.
Why a move is necessary and what issues will be resolved by moving the site
are points that have not yet been addressed.
Susan, this is a self-serving statement that smacks of bad faith.
The group would NOT be in the position it is now if you had not overreacted.
Period.
The group would NOT be in the position it is now if you had discussed
matters in good faith. Period.
This is self-created drama at its best.
You gambled that I would not respond in the newsgroup after the first post
you made. And as I have said to you, the irony is that had you not so
willfully and consistently misrepresented the facts and called my ethics
into question, I probably would not have responded.
You have now twice abruptly terminated email conversations by turning to the
group, without giving the group the benefit of all the facts. That is
deceitful.
Finally, your statement again is implying that I am somehow abusing the
trust placed in me. You have yet to give any evidence of this, despite
repeated requests on my part.
While this accurate, it is also misleading.
It would have been more correct to state that in lieu of a response to my
questions about the specific needs for a move, you have posted this thread
requesting said move. The manner of your post would tend to suggest that you
have tried everything to resolve the situation while I have been
unreasonable.
The reality is actually quite the opposite.
As with her first post to this newsgroup, Susan has willfully and
continuously misrepresented the facts.
The title of this thread alone is indicative of the situation. Susan has yet
to specify what the issues are that necessitate a move to a new site.
Insofar as she has not done so, how could we have any differences, let alone
irreconcilable ones?
Prior to this situation, there had been no issue. Not once has Susan ever
commented on any problems or expressed a desire, let alone a need, to have
anything structured any differently than it has been up until now. The only
logical conclusion is that it was the email in which I mentioned a move to a
database that has so affected Susan.
As has already been posted elsewhere, the database project was nothing new.
For all Susan's protestations in the initial thread on this subject, this
was not new information to her either.
Furthermore, it might be worthwhile noting that it was Susan herself who
indicated to me earlier this year that the PL might not be long in her
future. This fact she has neglected to bring up to the group, but it is
quite significant in the chain of events. It was precisely because of that
statement that the concept of the database was revived. Susan herself
acknowledges in this thread that a list that can be "easily maintained or
prepared by others" is the way to go.
The initial incident was a grossly overblown miscommunication that could
have been and should have been settled privately in a matter of a couple of
e-mail exchanges. Instead of simply addressing the issues, Susan became
increasingly irrational and posted here under false pretenses, declaring
that there was an urgent and immediate need to move the site. None of her
claims to urgency have been sustained in reality. What indeed was the
pressing and urgent need that sent this newsgroup into a frenzy a few weeks
back?
I take issue with Susan's insinuation that I have been inflexible, making a
power grab or any other such nonsense. That is just simply not true and not
an accurate representation of the facts. I have repeatedly asked Susan what
it is that she wants and have yet to receive a response. I have asked very
directed questions, including whether it was my involvement alone to which
she objected, yet have received no response. There has been no articulated
rationale for the need to move the site elsewhere.
What is perhaps much more telling is that when I expressed my belief that
the PL was a collaborative process and that I had never viewed it as a Power
issue, I was told that I should. That statement should give the members of
the newsgroup pause.
If there is a question as to who is really flexing muscle here, I would like
to point to these 2 statements:
"I do not intend to discuss what happened, why it happened, who was to blame
etc. etc. etc. Such a discussion won't change the bottom line. I would like
to move the Pricelessware List to a new location."
"I see no *point* in discussing the past. . ."
What is truly sad here is that I have always championed Susan from the
start. Whenever I had a difference of opinion with her, I addressed it to
her in private as not to undermine her. I have posted my opinion on a couple
of separate occasions, but never have I pressed my point nor left the
newsgroup in a huff as has been suggested. But I find myself now in the
bewildering position of having to explain away motivations I do not have.
There is no doubt that Susan has done a tremendous amount of work for the
PL. While her claims about always discussing and resolving matters in the
newsgroup are disingenuous, I don't think there are many who could or would
find fault with her efforts. But Susan's actions of the past few weeks leave
me with a great uneasiness. The members of this newsgroup should think long
and hard whether someone who is so inflexible, so closed-minded, so
manipulative, so deceitful is really the best person to represent the values
of the PL.
I have forwarded to SOS the necessary information that will remove the need
for my own future involvement.
G
Genna Reeney
Susan said:
Again, you are asked for specifics.
Again, you are evasive.
G
Genna Reeney
jo said:
There has been no evidence of control freakery.
G
Genna Reeney
Semolina said:
Susan has not shown why it is that she cannot maintain the site where it is
currently.
G
Genna Reeney
Roger said:
I hope that my post was sufficient to clarify matters.
R
ranrad
I've lurked here for many years now, had my ears pinned back when I
inadvertantly mis-spelt Genna as Geena.
I can remember Genna, SOS, Tiger, John Corlis, all regulars, and all the
founders of ACF & Pricelessware if memory serves.
My view, they should decide. I haven't seen or heard of Genna in a long
while, but if she is still involved then her wishes should be respected.
Susan, if you are not happy then do a web site of Pricelessware the way you
want it, let Genna keep her site the way she wants it then the ACF readers
can make their own choice which one they go to and/or prefer.
HTH, but I doubt it will
P
*ProteanThread*
Won Dampchin said:
I just want to know what the issues are that caused this.
--
Woodzy
http://www.rtdos.com (alt OS for games based on the classics)
http://rtdos.com/debate (charged political discussion)
http://rtdos.com/forum (rtdos message boards)
http://rtdos.com/rtdos (rtdos active developer chat)
http://rtdos.com/chat
Chats scheduled every Thursday @ 7PM MDT (0100 GMT) and
every Sunday @ 1PM MDT (1900 GMT)
?
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=
Why should that question even be considered?
Yet if you have reasons for wanting to remove the PL from
pricelessware.org, they are your reasons, and you are free to
discuss them here even if you have already discussed them in e-mail.
To support the notion that we should not need to discuss this, you
note in another post that there was no discussion when the PL went
to pricelessware.org. There was none because everyone thought it
was a good idea, a no-brainer. Pricelessware.org was and is the
ideal domain for the PL, easy to search for or to remember. (There
was some discussion of the pricelessware.com and .net domains, which
were not available.) Prior to pricelessware.org, it could be a PiTA
to find the PL on the web, whereas now it is very easy.
In the absence of reasons to remove the PL from pricelessware.org,
it should stay. And reasons for removing it do not appear to be
forthcoming.
S
Susan Bugher
Genna said:
Hello Genna,
IMO you have rather thoroughly breached the seal of privacy on the email
correspondence and I now am free to respond.
Here is one example of how the current arrangement has been "working".
Below is a copy of an email I sent to Genna on Feb. 24 of this year:
--------------
Subject: Pricelessware Help File
From: Susan Bugher
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:25:40 -0500
To: "Reeney, Genna"
Hi Genna,
FYI - let me and/or the group know if you have any concerns about this.
Karen S created two CHM files of the Pricelessware site. The Subject
heading for the thread about that is: CHM of Pricelessware, here
<q>
If anyone might want it... I've a copy of the Pricelessware.org site
compiled into HTML Help format, for offline reference/reading.
</q>
I uploaded the files to the PL site per a suggestion in the thread. What
is the size limit on the PL site? (The two files total close to 2MB.)
While I'm here . . .
Do you foresee yourself doing the Pricelessware pages in the future?
If you don't plan to return to the fray I'll work on Plan B: some means
of ensuring that maintainance of the site can be continued easily by others.
My long term goal is to work myself out of a job . . .
Susan
--------------
The next email I received from Genna was sent on June 5th.
Genna told me in later emails that this email was her *response* to my
Feb. 29th email.
Here is a copy of that email:
------------
Subject: PL issues
From: "Genna Reeney" <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 18:59:54 -0400
To: "Susan Bugher" <[email protected]>
Hi Susan -
Hope your summer is going well.
I wanted to check if you were you have had enough of the stress of manning
the PL.
Just to let you know:
- I changed the logo on the front page. I hated how it looked
- the 2001 May final PL is uploaded http://pricelessware.org/2001/
- the 2000 Feb final PL is uploaded http://pricelessware.org/2000/
- the original PL is uploaded http://pricelessware.org/first/
------------
It's perhaps worth noting a couple of points:
I began a thread on May 30th. Subject: Cumulative Pricelessware List
Genna did not participate in that discussion. I completed the revisions
to the Cumulative Pricelessware List on June 4th.
Genna's post was sent on June 5th.
I do not know if the programs on Genna's pages correspond to the
programs on the Cumulative List. She did not furnish that information
and I have not had time to make a detailed comparison.
The page that Genna "hated" and revised was one of my pages. It is
located in a part of the site that I do not have access to.
IMO all of you should now have *some* idea of why I think it is
necessary to move the Pricelessware List.
failure to communicate in a timely manner. . .
failure to respond to my questions. . .
I've been working around *unnecessary* problems for a long time. . .
IMO it's time to move to a new web site.
I have not responded to the remainder of Genna's post. If newsgroup
participants wish me to respond I will post more of the email
correspondence. IMO that would not serve any useful purpose but I will
oblige if the group feels it is necessary.
Susan
T
Tramp
|The page that Genna "hated" and revised was one of my pages. It is
|located in a part of the site that I do not have access to.
Stop exaggerating things. This is exactly what Genna was talking about.
You are totally twisting the facts. Genna has already stated that the
only part of the site that you don't have access to is the control panel
<[email protected]> she stated the
reason why you don't have access to this. She stated also stated that
lack of access to this section in no way hinders your ability to manage
the Pricelessware site. Yet here you are implying that there are more
things you don't have access to. Implying that you can't do your job
because of limitations set up by Genna.
|located in a part of the site that I do not have access to.
Stop exaggerating things. This is exactly what Genna was talking about.
You are totally twisting the facts. Genna has already stated that the
only part of the site that you don't have access to is the control panel
<[email protected]> she stated the
reason why you don't have access to this. She stated also stated that
lack of access to this section in no way hinders your ability to manage
the Pricelessware site. Yet here you are implying that there are more
things you don't have access to. Implying that you can't do your job
because of limitations set up by Genna.