AKA spam. "ktl" also left out the fact that they want to use your home
address to send you junk mail and God only knows what with your phone
number (idiots who telemarket *me* get an earful of raw, menacing
hatred that they don't soon forget.)
This is true, although if they want too much information I personally
don't use them. Some registerwares only want your name and email
address and I usually don't have a problem with that. But these are
choices that *I* made for *myself*.
Other people don't mind exposing their soft underbelly to the world
by making their vital, personal information public and can make their
own choices.
Unfortunately, John C. and some others in this group have a very narrow view
of what "Freeware" is, and "Registerware" is not considered to be valid.
Check out JC's FAQ at
http://www.ccountry.net/~jcorliss/F.A.Q./FrameSet1.html for details.
*sigh* HERE WE GO AGAIN!!!
Jim, you're putting words in my mouth. That "registerware is not
considered to be valid" by me and the majority in this group simply
isn't true. Here's a quote from the very link you provide. Note the
last line carefully:
"Registerware - The cost is that
you must provide personal information
via registration. Some people falsify
the information which is requested.
However, since the author has asked
the price, falsifying what they are
asking for is not ethical. *Registerware
is often discussed in alt.comp.freeware.*"
It *ISN'T* ethical to *LIE* to people when their request for personal
information is part of the deal. That's just a simple fact that I
doubt many will dispute unless they're without ethics or are simply
trolling.
Also, my decision NOT to provide my phone number and address to
*people I don't* know is a logical one IMO but is also a personal
choice. Besides, I *said* it was a personal choice in my post and I quote:
"Unfortunately, the second part of
the registration process requires
that you provide your name, address
and phone number. I'm not willing to
do that or to falsify that information.
But that's just a personal choice. Others
may feel differently."
What part of that is a problem for you? Aren't I entitled to personal
choices of this nature like the rest of the world? 80)>
As far as my having a "narrow view" of the definition of freeware,
that's definitely the case and will remain so. However, you (like a
lot of other minority view holders) always seem to miss the point.
My version of the F.A.Q. does *NOT* say that only pure freeware
should be discussed in this group. Read that definitions page more
closely and you'll note that the following are often discussed here:
Betaware when evaluation is optional
Careware
CDWare (if available as a download on the internet)
Donationware
Liteware (if it doesn't border on being nagware)
Orphanware (if the author okays it)
Postcardware
*REGISTERWARE*
The types of software that the majority of this group has determined
AREN'T on topic include the following:
Adware
Betaware (when evaluation isn't optional)
CDWare (when you have to buy a magazine to get it)
Commercial software (unless when mentioned for feature comparison)
Demoware
Orphanware (when author specifically doesn't want it available)
Shareware
Spyware
Trialware
Viruses or virus authoring software
Warez
Hell, I even *color coded* the lines saying whether or not a type of
software is discussed in this group or not. How could you have missed
it unless you're color blind (and I'm sorry if this is the case)?
Also (*once again I have to mention this*) note that my version of
the F.A.Q. has the following disclaimer right on the first page (non
frame) and at the top of the left frame (frame version):
"Note: This F.A.Q. doesn't necessarily
reflect the views of all those who post
regularly to the alt.comp.freeware
newsgroup. It is intended as a guide only."
As for taking another vote on the definitions page, I believe two things:
1. The demographic sample used as well as the lopsided results
obtained during the initial vote were adequate to reflect the ongoing
opinions of the general public.
2. Thanks to various trolls flooding this group with sock puppets, as
well as the possibility that Microsoft may have an agenda of
eliminating freeware (the possibility that they *don't* also exists,
because a lot of their "ideas" "probably" come from other software), I
no longer believe that taking an accurate vote is possible.
Besides, there are very few (if any) arguments about my definitions
page which haven't been bludgeoned to death in this group and the page
reflects the *majority* opinion as best as I can make it. This is not
to say that I turn a deaf ear to reasonable and well delineated logic.
It's just I don't respond to vague claims like yours and when I have
to waste time correcting and-or clarifying things.
Yes, this is an unmoderated group and yes, you can say whatever you
want. However, there will *always* be people like me to point out when
off topic posts are made. And even though complaining about the fact
that many of us continue to try to keep posts on topic is a total
waste of time, I don't expect that's going to stop at any time in the
near future either.
That's simply the nature of usenet.
Over and out.
