|There's nothing paranoid about wanting to know the identity of someone
|who claims to be the 'admin' at Pricelessware.
|It's not just as badge that's handed out willy-nilly to anyone who's
|prepared to buy one with a few bucks ( quite the contrary, in fact ).
|
|> Who cares if I am posting
|>anonymously?
|
|Me, for a start - especially if you're claiming to act on behalf of a
|body which you have no right to speak for. Or do you...we don't know.
Since I participate in the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup I am a
member of Pricelessware.org
I disagree... I participate... and I don't consider myself anything
other than a NG participant. Pricelessware is a concept to which we
contribute.
|> People need to focus on the right thing here.
|
|Surely the right thing is to place the matter in the hands of those
|who're responsible for administrating the Pricelessware pages?
Susan does more than her fair share for Pricelessware. She does
more than any one by far. To burden her with even more work is
not fair.
It would have been fair to consult with her first, at least. And
given that you yourself recognise her contribution it would have been
polite to have checked with her first. It would then have been
sensible to have announced any such arrangements made on behalf of the
organisation.
I mean...who's to say you didn't email the authors and say "agree to
this proposal or we'll sling you off the pricelessware page"?
OK, I suspect not, but hey, without accountability there's just
supposition.
|Is that you?
No I am not responsible for administrating the Pricelessware
pages. This alone does not disqualify me from speakin on behalf
of Pricelessware.
So having a vote entitles you to make ad-hoc policy?
I don't believe that.
Do you sincerely believe that by casting one single vote for a piece
of software, you automatically assume the right to speak on behalf of
everyone else who participated?
If that's the case then I assume the right to deny you that privilege
in my capacity as administrator.
|>Basically all I am doing is the leg work. The people that
|>replied to the orginal thread about a Pricelessware CD seem to
|>be in favor it. I didn't see anyone stepping up to do the leg
|>work.
|
|That doesn't mean it wasn't happening.
You are right of course. I had/have no idea if others were doing
the same thing or not.
Indeed, and your efforts - however well-meaning, could have had
unfortunate consequences in ongoing negotiations with those who more
properly considered themselves qualified to speak on behalf of the
organisation.
Perhaps even now Susan is being deluged with emails from concerned
authors...thus creating more work for her?
|
|> There has to be a general idea on how many authors will
|>allow their programs to be included on a CD. If for example only
|>half the programs listed On Pricelessware are approved by the
|>authors than it might not be worth it to do a CD. What I posted
|>is the same thing I am sending to the authors. I ask them if it
|>would be ok to include their program on a CD. I will post their
|>replys here is that is what you wish.
|
|The issue is not that they replied, rather it's that you - an unknown
|entity - masqueraded as someone to do with administration of the
|pricelessware pages.
I think you misunderstand Pricelessware. The person who
administrates the pages of Pricelessware does not have any more
power than any one else who is a "member" of Pricelessware. They
are only responsible for aking sure that the links work and that
the pages are updated when needed.
By common courtesy it's entirely fair to assume that that person, by
dint of their effort, is more entitled to speak on behalf of the
organisation as a whole.
Indeed, even if you disagree, the whole principle of pricelessware is
based on a vote...and you should have stated your intentions and put
them to the same vote that you seem to feel gives you the right to act
on the organisation's behalf.
|
|I think it would be wise for those concerned to seriously consider a
|trademark, or some other such copyright protection.
I could be wrong about this, but wouldn't this give just one
person the copyright? If so hat if that person left Pricelssware?
Yep, I agree that's a knotty point - but at the same time what's to
stop, say, Bill Gates Esq from publishing ' Windows XP - Pricelessware
Edition'?
Perhaps it's something we should consider?
|Don't get me wrong - I fully understand your motivation, I just
|think the method is wrong.
That's cool. Atleast the motivation is there.
Yes, and I'm not criticising the fact that you decided that someone
should get off their arse and put words into practice...I think that's
commendable...it's simply the fact that you claimed to speak on behalf
of pricelessware when I don't believe you had that mandate.
I'm also entirely uncomfortable about your anonymity - anything to do
with the administration of pricelessware should be right out in the
open, or as much as it can be via this medium.
I love the idea, in principle...I'd subscribe - but let's discuss it
first and act when there's at least a general consensus...and let's do
so with full accountability.
Having said all that, it would be churlish to dismiss the results
you've gleaned, I think they clearly demonstrate that the notion of a
CD edition is a possibility.
Regards,
