PL issues

[Genna Reeney]

One point...look at your license regarding the CD project.

Would you please stop calling it MY anything? As I have written before, I
had nothing whatsoever to do with the CD project. Either call it the license
that the group drafted or attribute it to the person(s) who wrote it, but
don't make it mine. It just is NOT my work.

What
percentage of preparation of that was conducted publicly...if this is
a public project?

I think that the people directly involved with this project are better
qualified to answer this question. I have absolutely ZERO knowledge of this.

Your license is literally a piece of crap and has
more holes than swiss cheese. It reeks of someone taking maybe 3
minutes to rip some half-read license out of some half-baked program
written by some 4th grader in his first week of VB.

Again, *I* did not do anything. Please address your concerns to those
directly involved with the project.

As much as I
followed the threads when it was being generated, I didn't see a
whole lot on that matter. Another point...was it put to some kind of
open discussion about what permissions would be requested from the
various authors and distribution houses? Not that I saw. I read this
group on a daily basis.

Again, you should address this question to those that were directly involved
in the project.
Quite frankly, I don't think this was the best way to go about it. But
that's a different discussion for a different time.

 

[Susan Bugher]

If other people are engaging in illegal behavior and/or had ulterior motives
in setting up the CD in the first place, that matter should be investigated.

Good grief Genna, this is exactly the kind of remark you have been
*objecting* to in this thread. Please don't give credence to baseless
accusations.

Susan

 

[Ben Cooper]

Ahem.

I will vouch for the veracity of this. Genna approached me years ago
with the idea of eventually moving to a database format as even then
the sheer scope of the work involved was becoming unmanageable.

Anyone can see that the PL list has grown much larger and will
continue to do so at an exponential rate.

BTW Genna bought the domain name so that Pricelessware would have a
stable home. She even (snif) dedicated it to me. Although it's been a
while since it last happened, regular ACF folks know that my site goes
down on occasion. I tell you now (I'm a little embarrassed about this)
it's because I have **NO MONEY** (and probably never will)and
sometimes can't pay my ISP.

Ladies and germs, please listen to an old fart for a moment. The
reason people talk on the phone is because words on a page bring
nothing of the context of the message or the feelings of the writer
with them....why do you think smileys were invented? I don't think we
actually have a <disagreement> here, just some confusion.

Now let's bury the hatchet <<In The Ground>> shall we?

Well, I'll take some blame for this. I *did* research the origins of
Pricelessware and I was being facetious when I said it was a sham.
A database would make it easier to maintain and search, I don't know
that it would make it easier to navigate. Navigation is in the eye of
the beholder.

I do believe there's something else going on "behind the scenes";
otherwise, I don't think Susan would have posted what she posted. Susan
has become the spokesperson and maintainer for the Pricelessware site.
Genna isn't, not recently, anyway.

It looks like there are a few people who *should* "bury the hatchet",
but, I think I'll keep mine out anyway, just in case.

 

[POKO]

The change to a database format was something that I had working on a couple
of years ago.
The idea behind it was to make the site more user-friendly, in that it would
be easier to navigate, easier to search. From the behind-the-scenes aspect,
it would mean that the site would be much easier to maintain.

I don't see why this is a problem.

Hello Genna,
Good to see your name on my screen after so long. My post to Susan asked
for clarification which your post has supplied.
My only concern with this is that Susan, our webmaster, may or may not
be happy with this decision after she has poured her heart and soul into
the site. I can understand this being a webmaster bound by the whim of
the site owner. I've been trying to get my brother to move on something
I've suggested with no luck.
If Susan is not prepared to continue, what is your intention? Are you
prepared to do all the work?
I hate to see this happening 'to our family'. I hope you and Susan are
taking this to e-mail or phone to try to work out the problem(s), real
or perceived.
Best,
POKO
--
P. Keenan - Webmaster
Web Page Design
Manitoulin Island, Canada
http://manitoulinislandwebdesign.it-mate.co.uk/
(e-mail address removed)

 

[JanC]

I had no less than 20 IP's that were put into the block list for one
of 3 main reasons...running scripts, attempting to go outside the
designated folders made available to anonymous login, attempting to
manipulate files...particularly attempting to add and/or delete and/or
replace files in the a.c.f. CD programs folders.

Any professional sysadmin knows this sort of things happens all the time.
Probably just some "script kiddies" or maybe "warez people" searching for a
"dump". Make your server secure (it seems like you did) and there is no
real problem for you.

 

[Genna Reeney]

Sounds like sense to me. We seem to have gotten well away from my OP
which simply asked:

What are the *details* of the proposed plan: who, what, why, where,
when, how

Susan -

You were the one to get away from the OP by declaring within a matter of
hours that a move to a new site was necessary and imperative.

I find it surprising that of all the posts on this thread, the only one you
seem willing to address is this one. You have not addressed why you found it
necessary to imply that other motivations were at work, other than the ones
I had specifically stated to you by email, namely to make the site more
user-friendly, in that it would be easier to navigate, easier to search, and
easier to maintain.

I don't know if the problem is that you are making the incorrect assumption
that anyone is trying to push you aside. If that is your concern, then you
can rest assured that is absolutely not the case. Nowhere have I said that
and nowhere did I imply that.

There is no reason why this had to become such a problem. Again, the move to
a database was contemplated almost from the inception of the PL. As I
mentioned to you by email, this is no different than changing the structure
and look of the list, as you did earlier this year, once a new PL is
approved. I simply don't see what you find so threatening about this.

who

- one or more who are technically savvy and can construct the database
- anyone currently involved with the PL who would wish to be involved (and
yes, that would include you)
- anyone else who indicate strong and serious interest in helping work out
kinks, including testing

what
self-explanatory

why

to make the site more user-friendly, in that it would be easier to navigate,
easier to search, and easier to maintain

where

on the current site

when

in time for the PL 2005 nomination process

how

that's for the database experts to decide

 

[Genna Reeney]

Good grief Genna, this is exactly the kind of remark you have been
*objecting* to in this thread. Please don't give credence to baseless
accusations.

I am not giving credence.
I have NO basis to make any judgments about this, having NOT been involved
with this project.

 

[Genna Reeney]

I can think of ONE reason.

I only speak HTML (and the tiniest bit of PHP). Does a non-swimmer
have
the choice to swim to shore from the middle of an ocean?

Susan -

Where does it say that you have to be the one to code the project?
At no time did I suggest that.

Being involved, and again, you certainly would be if you chose to be, does
not mean that you have to be able to do everything.

Early 2006 is a MUCH BETTER target date - after PL2005 - that's only a
few months further away.

I think that this is for coders to decide. The PL2005 is in November.
If they feel that 4 months is not enough time to get this set up, then that
is one thing.
I don't think we should dismiss the possibility out of hand.

It seems silly to me to create so much extra work, if this can be
implemented in time. If not, so be it.

 

[JanC]

I don't follow the logic here.
Why would it have to move from its present location?

From what I understand there is (was?) a problem where updating certain
parts of the site would give the maintainer(s) access to private
information about you or something like that?

There might be a solution for that, but this isn't clear to me and I think
to several other people here...

 

[JanC]

Ladies and germs, please listen to an old fart for a moment. The reason
people talk on the phone is because words on a page bring nothing of the
context of the message or the feelings of the writer with them....why do
you think smileys were invented? I don't think we actually have a
<disagreement> here, just some confusion.

+1

 

[Susan Bugher]

This is incorrect.
The only thing you do NOT have access to is the main page for the simple
reason that it would give you access to the Control Panel which contains my
financial information.

That's certainly a valid reason for not allowing full access. A new site
would not have that problem.

As for the inability to access the site, I still don't know what the problem
was, but that was corrected within a couple of days. I don't believe that
has ever happened before.

It was corrected when you sent me a new password - but several days and
several emails is not efficient - I believe your stated goal *is* more
efficiency?

It *has* happened before - luckily not during the PL2004 selection
process. . .

I don't appreciate your attempts to present a one-time occurence as a
systemic problem.

I didn't.

Whoa...
Again, lack of access is not an accurate statement. See above.

Lack of access *is* a problem. Can *I* create the PL2005 directory?

Susan

 

[JanC]

Genna Reeney emailed me a few days ago regarding the Pricelessware site.
She wants to change the site to a database format. We have had some
email correspondence.

IMO further discussion should be in the newsgroup.

I have many unanswered questions. . . What are the *details* of the
proposed plan: who, what, why, where, when, how - especially who. . .

One thing to note: using a database does not necessarily mean that you need
a database & scripting support on the server. Solutions exist where you
keep data in a database on the local PC of the "maintainer" and automaticly
create .html files from that locally and then upload these to the server.

(This is just an option to consider, I have no opinion on what's the best
solution yet.)

 

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

dszady wrote:

I've just read this thread straight through, and I have no idea why
you make these allegations.

Genna owns the domain pricelessware.org, which hosts the PL. She
registered that domain for the benefit of all of us, and has always
handled the responsibility that comes with owning the domain with
great integrity. People taking potshots at her over the domain
registration either are very badly misinformed or are acting
maliciously. There is every reason to believe she will continue to
act with integrity in maintaining the registration and keeping the
site online, and there is no reason to believe otherwise.

And I see nothing to indicate 'clandestine maneuvering.' AFAICT,
Genna simply again made the suggestion that the PL be put in
database format. I can confirm that it's not a new idea, not that
anyone should need my confirmation after getting it from SoS. It's
just an idea that has not up to now gained traction. (FWIW, ISTM a
good idea, and I hope it gains enough support and volunteers to move
forward soon.) Though of course I have not read the e-mails, it makes
sense to me that Genna would run the idea by Susan, who has done the
lion's share of the work on the site for a while now, before opening
discussion here; Genna has never made changes to the way the PL is
handled without seeking and finding group concensus, and I do not
believe she ever would.

Whoa! Let's back up a bit. Genna's done a great deal for the
group. I appreciate her efforts and I'm sure her plans are
intended to benefit the group.

The problem is *communication* with the group - or rather lack of
communication. . . the Pricelessware web site *is* a group thing
and decisions about is should be made in the group. . .

I do not see this communication problem. This thread is less than
two days old and 53 articles in it have reached me. 17 of those
articles are from Genna. Entering a thread a day after it starts is
as close to real-time response as I would hope to expect on Usenet.
ISTM that she continues to be willing as ever to communicate with
the group when needed.

I think the Pricelssware List *will* have to move from the present
site - IMO as we leave we should thank Genna for providing that
site for several years.

IMO there is no reason for moving, but I do agree about the thanks.

 

[Genna Reeney]

There is a *longer* period of time available between PL2005 and
PL2006.

There is an even longer period of time between PL2005 and PL2007.
The point of the exercise is to simplify life for everyone involved. If this
can be done in time for the PL2005, why wait an additional year? It seems
pointless to me.

Take the list you made of all the programs by year. Wouldn't it have been
much simpler to be able to simply enter a search string and get the results,
instead of hard-coding all of the information? Do you really want to go
through all of the same work by hand again in 6 months or wouldn't you be
happier to be able to simply input each program once and not have to worry
about the hard-coding individual pages?

I will be point person in those discussions. That takes time.

I don't see why one project prevents the other.

Genna, why do you say that?

You have disagreed with me most emphatically on several occasions. I
did
not take that as a personal attack. We may disagree on issues. That
does
not change my high regard for you.

Well, then you have a better recollection than I do, because I do NOT
remember disagreeing with you emphatically about anything. I have made it a
point to stay out of most PL discussions and really pretty much just lurk,
because I don't wish to undermine your efforts. In fact, I would venture to
say that my posts have been in general and specific support of your efforts
on behalf of the group.

The only issue which I brought to the group was the one regarding the
posting of a rather scathing review of a program that resulted in
mail-bombs, threats and letters to my server provider. I had not seen the
page before, was stunned to find it on the PL site and I asked you to remove
it. You refused and said that I should take it up with the group. I did so
and the consensus was that the page should stay. That was the end of it.

I certainly have never posted that you be removed from participating in the
PL process, which is essentially what you were suggesting be done about me,
by requesting that the list be moved to a different site.

 

[Genna Reeney]

Ha! Well, a big huffy sigh right back at you.
Actually, Google is my best friend. I did look up everything, even the
original posts on Pricelessware. That's why I thought the whois was
funny. Unless, you're still at that address and phone number?

I thought you were being serious ...

 

[JanC]

As owner of the domain, you also own everything on it. The newsgroup
participants have no legal status to own anything, unless some type of
foundation were to be organized allowing people to become members and
take an active role in its operation.

That's not exact: everything on the site that's not attributed to other
people or organisations is suspected to be owned by the owner of the site,
but AFAIK all pages say "© alt.comp.freeware 1999-2004", so everything is
owned by everybody of us.
(All this until proof of ownership is given by someone else ;-)

 

[Genna Reeney]

From what I understand there is (was?) a problem where updating
certain parts of the site would give the maintainer(s) access to
private information about you or something like that?

That is not the case.
Susan has had access to all of the pages. The only page she cannot access
directly is the index page:
http://pricelessware.org

Giving her access to that would indeed give her access to private
information. But I fail to see why she would need to have access to that
page in the first place.

As a matter of fact, the directory structure of the site was changed when
Susan came on board, specifically so that she would have access to
everything.

 

[JanC]

That is not the case.
Susan has had access to all of the pages. The only page she cannot access
directly is the index page:
http://pricelessware.org

Giving her access to that would indeed give her access to private
information. But I fail to see why she would need to have access to that
page in the first place.

That page has a link that has to be updated at least once a year, right...?
There is an easy solution for this: make the link fixed.

Now the link is:
<http://pricelessware.org/2004/about2004PL.htm>

Change that to:
<http://pricelessware.org/current/>

If I understand correctly, Susan could be allowed to access this directory
and thus to change a redirect placed there that points to the "current" PL.


(Just trying to help

 

[Genna Reeney]

Good to see your name on my screen after so long.

Likewise.

My only concern with this is that Susan, our webmaster, may or may not
be happy with this decision after she has poured her heart and soul
into
the site. I can understand this being a webmaster bound by the whim of
the site owner. I've been trying to get my brother to move on
something
I've suggested with no luck.
If Susan is not prepared to continue, what is your intention? Are you
prepared to do all the work?
I hate to see this happening 'to our family'.

Poko -

Nothing about this is intended as a slight against Susan at all. As I have
said repeatedly, this had been the plan all along. I posted about it before.
This is not news.

There is NO intention to push Susan aside.
In terms of maintenance, everything would be so much simpler, no
hard-coding, simply entering data quickly. I just simply do NOT see the
downside. The only question in my mind is whether this can be achieved in
time. There is no reason it couldn't be, but I won't make that final call.

I hope you and Susan are
taking this to e-mail or phone to try to work out the problem(s), real
or perceived.

This was being handled privately, originally.
I had no intention to undermine Susan or create any unnecessary drama.

 

[Susan Bugher]

One thing to note: using a database does not necessarily mean that you need
a database & scripting support on the server. Solutions exist where you
keep data in a database on the local PC of the "maintainer" and automaticly
create .html files from that locally and then upload these to the server.

(This is just an option to consider, I have no opinion on what's the best
solution yet.)

It's not just an option to *consider*. That is exactly the *present*
setup. I posted about this in some detail not too long ago:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=d...&[email protected]&rnum=3


PL2003, PL2004, the acf program pages, everything *I've* done is
*already* in database format. The acf program pages are new since I
wrote that - 3000+ apps in that database.


Susan