J
John Corliss
Son said:
That is indeed good news. I'm all for it happening. Garrett is
definitely a great choice and my thanks to him for volunteering!
That is indeed good news. I'm all for it happening. Garrett is
definitely a great choice and my thanks to him for volunteering!
S
Susan Bugher
Ceg said:
70 people (+/-) voted in the PL2003 selection process
100 people voted in the PL2004 selection process
51 people voted in the referendum to move the PL web site
Susan
R
R. L.
This SHOULD NOT even be the issue at all (and shouldn't even
go there)!
Who conduct the voting process is not important. Voting what
freeware are good and reporting the results are DIFFERENT
things and DIFFERENT issues. Although Pricelessware is
copyrighted, but I *think* it is not copyrighted to the
"site", it is copyrighted so that nobody have a piece of
software could falsely claim that it is Pricelessware (i.e.,
voted by the participant as Pricelessware in this group) so to
get more customers.
As the set of information (about what got voted) become more
seeked, making the information available in different
forms/format for users have become a big task. It is a lot of
works to conduct the voting, it is ALSO and perhaps EVEN MORE
work to maintain or *create* AND *design* a site to provide
that information. We have been very lucky that Susan wasn't
mind doing both and Genna didn't either. But there is not a
strict reason to just assume the one who would report the
results will necessarily be the one who conduct the process
(although it might as well be, but it doesn't have to).
Thus, one process is enough and no one need to just for
personal/destructive reason to conduct another one.
The most important things is that we make sure that the final
results (a complete list) of the voting is accurately
perserved in the ACF usenet archieve (so no one can claim
their ware as to be if it is not). And anyone can report this
results in different formats and different designs (visiter
will vote by their clicks)
Finally, although some said Garrett has not been involved that
much lately, let's not forget when Susan first start doing the
job, she was almost completely new to the group.
--
RL
*******************************************
Unofficial Adaware Updater:
http://home.earthlink.net/
~ringomei/Unofficial_adaware_updater.html
Little (File) Backer Upper:
http://home.earthlink.net/
~ringomei/Backup_tool_Backer_Upper.html
Uptime Quickie; Lefty Animated Cursors;
http://home.earthlink.net/~ringomei/page2.html
*******************************************
R
R. L.
Although I did have the same wish, but it is past tense now.
She has complete right to keep her domain and we should be
glad to hear that it will continue to be devoted to this group
(putting personal matters aside, shouldn't this be great?)
Let's move on, then. Afterall, when one mention participants
we are not talking about *all participants* anyway.
It doesn't really matter, though. The most important thing is
not the name of the domain, but rather, is what you may be
able to offer and whether YOU are happy about it. Susan,
giving your passion I am sure you will have a wonderful site
which present the Pricelessware voting results in a user
friendly way. Please don't worry about other negative
comments (you know, the same amount of time to reply to them
may as well be put to your new site). I believe that you will
certainly be doing a good job in the mirror site.
Exactly. As I said, I like ur suggestion (you never reply,
though), how about Pricelesswarelist.net??
--
RL
*******************************************
Unofficial Adaware Updater:
http://home.earthlink.net/
~ringomei/Unofficial_adaware_updater.html
Little (File) Backer Upper:
http://home.earthlink.net/
~ringomei/Backup_tool_Backer_Upper.html
Uptime Quickie; Lefty Animated Cursors;
http://home.earthlink.net/~ringomei/page2.html
*******************************************
K
Klaatu
Yes, those clothes on the emperor look grand, do they not?
S
Semolina Pilchard
Ah, Mr.Thread. You quote 40 lines to answer one. How economical of
you!
If cogency of argument could be equated with number of lines quoted
and the amount of garbled, ill thought out rubbish typed, you'd have
won long ago. Indeed, I defy anyone to follow such logic as may exist
in your recent posts.
You're a morphing little fellow, aren't you? I've stuck you in my
bozo bin four times but you always pop out again, like any troll. I
don't think you are a troll, however, just a poor miserable lackwit
with just enough grey matter to realise that most people would prefer
to avoid your witless maunderings, so you change persona and carry on
as before.
Do yourself a favour, Mr. Thread. Type your inspired thoughts into a
text editor, leave them for an hour, then delete them. Your
contribution will be so much more appreciated.
S
Semolina Pilchard
Susan's decency in refusing to use private correspondence to back her
argument is to be admired, not used against her, Tramp.
Isn't it easy to flap your trap when you have no idea what you're
talking about?
K
Klaatu
So sayeth the great and powerful *ProteanShake^H^H^H^H^HThread* !!!
So it is written; so shall it be done!
T
Tramp
|Susan's decency in refusing to use private correspondence to back her
|argument is to be admired, not used against her, Tramp.
When it has to do with the Pricelessware site it will and shall be held
against her.
|argument is to be admired, not used against her, Tramp.
When it has to do with the Pricelessware site it will and shall be held
against her.
S
Susan Bugher
R. L. said:
Of course Genna has a right to keep *her* domain.
but. . .
The votes have been counted. . .
It's *not* the Pricelessware List web site now. . .
It is still *Genna's* site. . .
Just as it has always been. . .
The point is the new web site will *not* be a mirror site. It will be
the "official" web site for the Pricelessware List. Anyone who wishes to
mirror it is welcome to do so.
I did reply this morning - guess you missed it. I like the name - can't
take credit for it though - it was someone else's suggestion.
Susan
B
Ben Cooper
Son said:
Well, this is a disappointment.
So, who do I write to to have my name removed from the list of CD
Burners on the Pricelessware.org site?
I don't want to have any affiliation with the owners of
Pricelessware.org.
H
Henk de Jong
Tramp said:
Behave, my child. Behave....
The best prove of that is in the future. When everybody wants success
in this, it might be possible. But only, when everybody wants this....
What I wrote can be seen as at least a *try* to avoid the splitting of
this group. I still believe (and hope) that there will be a time that
there will be peace again in here. I hope that my suggestion is a begin
of the process to *peace*.
Love that shirt you're wearing.
Thanks. But it is already an old one. Need some new shirts. Some shops
have a sale right now, so maybe I'll take a look for some new ones
--
Henk de Jong
The Netherlands
(e-mail address removed) (Remove _NO_SPAM_)
'Links to Freeware'
http://www.linkstofreeware.vze.com/
http://home.hccnet.nl/hmdejong/
H
Henk de Jong
Ceg wrote on 1-7-2004 :
I mean with "this *whole* group" those people that contribute on a more
or less regular basis in this group. Only from those people you can
read their opinions and their votes. Basicly those people make this
group. Without them there will nothing that can be read by the readers.
With kind regards,
--
Henk de Jong
The Netherlands
(e-mail address removed) (Remove _NO_SPAM_)
'Links to Freeware'
http://www.linkstofreeware.vze.com/
http://home.hccnet.nl/hmdejong/
I mean with "this *whole* group" those people that contribute on a more
or less regular basis in this group. Only from those people you can
read their opinions and their votes. Basicly those people make this
group. Without them there will nothing that can be read by the readers.
With kind regards,
--
Henk de Jong
The Netherlands
(e-mail address removed) (Remove _NO_SPAM_)
'Links to Freeware'
http://www.linkstofreeware.vze.com/
http://home.hccnet.nl/hmdejong/
C
Corncrake
Up until now I had the higest regard for Son Of Spy, but I think this
latest offering is misguided
In the UK the Conservative party came in for a lot of 'stick' for the
way it chose its leaders ( and Prime Ministers ) by a behind the doors
election by the high&mighty and the great&good
I see something similar here.
Several times in the various threads suggestions have been made for
volunteers to step forward and be voted on and aproved by acf.
I even thought that Genna or SoS might step up and do the onnerable
thing !
No one did come forward. Now it seems one has been appointed.
No offence to Garrett, I dont know the chap, he may well be a good
(even the best ?) candidate for all I know, but this is not the way to
go about it ( IMHO ! )
So, do we have a Garrett site and a Susan site and we all vote in
1 year (6 month, whatever) time ??
I wonder if Susan "up with this will put"
we will see an un-un-resignation ? I wont blame her a bit.
So much used to be made of her desire to obtain the domain on behalf
of and for the use of acf. Now we know the truth. (but if I were to
say that I saw all this coming from the day she "went after" that
other Pricelessware domain holder, in Canada was he ?, you'd all say
that hindsight can be a wonderfull thing )
It is odd that Genna can manage to communicate in private with chosen
people, yet cannot talk to the group and/or Susan. No wonder that this
mess has arisen.
All that may be so, but what a way to do it !
Excellent, you going to write his election manifesto then ?)
That is the "Royal" "we" is it ?
Now that is a very good idea,
G'night all.
latest offering is misguided
In the UK the Conservative party came in for a lot of 'stick' for the
way it chose its leaders ( and Prime Ministers ) by a behind the doors
election by the high&mighty and the great&good
I see something similar here.
Several times in the various threads suggestions have been made for
volunteers to step forward and be voted on and aproved by acf.
I even thought that Genna or SoS might step up and do the onnerable
thing !
No one did come forward. Now it seems one has been appointed.
No offence to Garrett, I dont know the chap, he may well be a good
(even the best ?) candidate for all I know, but this is not the way to
go about it ( IMHO ! )
So, do we have a Garrett site and a Susan site and we all vote in
1 year (6 month, whatever) time ??
I wonder if Susan "up with this will put"
we will see an un-un-resignation ? I wont blame her a bit.
So much used to be made of her desire to obtain the domain on behalf
of and for the use of acf. Now we know the truth. (but if I were to
say that I saw all this coming from the day she "went after" that
other Pricelessware domain holder, in Canada was he ?, you'd all say
that hindsight can be a wonderfull thing )
It is odd that Genna can manage to communicate in private with chosen
people, yet cannot talk to the group and/or Susan. No wonder that this
mess has arisen.
All that may be so, but what a way to do it !
Excellent, you going to write his election manifesto then ?
)That is the "Royal" "we" is it ?
Amen, and genuflections, light a candle or three ?
Now that is a very good idea,
G'night all.
C
Corncrake
I'll second that.
When others wanted rid of the task Susan came forward and improved
magnificently on what went before.
Until this battle commenced I would have said ( like Newton did)
that Susan stood on the shoulders of giants to reach where she did.
Now I have a low opinion of those acf giants that went before her.
if you see what I mean,,
sadened I am,,
S
Susan Bugher
Henk said:
I hope so to Henk. I hope this attempt to *split* the group is seen for
what it is. Having lost the election Genna is trying to steal the ballot
box. . .
Susan
P
*ProteanThread*
Susan Bugher said:
How could she ? she and SoS have hardly posted any response.
S
scroob
<snip>
Great way to get around my killfile - misspell Pricelessware.
Great way to get around my killfile - misspell Pricelessware.
S
Semolina Pilchard
I suppose it depends on the principles on which you base your life.
Here we have two individuals, both wholly admirable, neither of whom
was particularly forthcoming about the breach between them, doubtless
because they felt it would be betrayal of the basic trust we have in
communicating privately with each other. I think they're absolutely
right. I wouldn't write many emails if I thought they'd be quoted
back at me, out of context, in alt.comp.freeware.
People disagree. It happens. If we feel we need to know the details
of that disagreement, perhaps we should examine our own motives for
feeling that way. Isn't it just a little prurient?
What we need for Pricelessware is a democratic nomination/seconding/
ballot process and a site that reflects that, accurately. That's what
Susan has given us. Frankly, I'm pleased she has the skills, patience
and persistence to do it and get it so right. I wouldn't have.
I can't see what it is you feel should be held against her. Enlighten
me, if you will.
Z
Zorro
I'm a long-time admirer of SOS and Genna, I have witnessed Susan's
excellent work -- I am particularly grateful for the CD initiative,
whatever the offlist ramifications -- and know Garrett's Web site. I don't
know these people personally.
Regretfully, I missed this discussion during my "birthday season." I think
I could have bridged the gap in understanding. It's clear to me that the
technical issue behind the whole brouhaha spins around equally valid, yet
different concepts of what a database is and how it should work with
respect to a Web site.
Susan contended she has a database and cited Quattro Pro, which I know and
love, and I understand perfectly well that what she has is an offline
database that can be transformed into HTML and posted as such.
Genna contended that an online database was required. I know of those, too,
and they function fine (I understand that Garrett's Web site was/is
essentially an online database).
How each method works is affects who has effective control of the
information and here there is a matter of trust (apparently lost for
reasons I don't need to know).
Susan's method relies on a database that is entirely independent of the
site setup and does not require any particular server-side specialized
software. The administrator can do it all offline and post it. It is
independent of whether a Web site host runs on Linux or Windows, whether it
runs on mysql or oracle or whatever. Control, in this instance, is entirely
in the hands of whomever has the most recently updated offline database. In
the setup that has prevailed until the present, this would mean Susan.
Genna's method relies on a database that is dependent on server-side
software dependent, no matter what client software is used offline. Not all
hosts offer all particular software. Moreover, if the online database is
passworded, then the person who owns the domain and has the contract with
the host effectively controls the information.
So it all depends on whom you trust. I think both Genna and Susan seem
trustworthy.
As to who owns the information legally, that is debatable. Under U.S.
copyright law, the author of original work owns whatever he or she creates
from the moment it is written, painted, etc. Courts have held
that compilations of data, such as the telephone directory, cannot be
copyrighted -- although the format in which such data are arranged can be
protected. So no one can photocopy the telephone directory and sell that.
Arguably, the author of the form in which the Pricelessware List is
presented can claim ownership to that. Each vote and each message posted on
the news group, however, legally belongs to each author. Not the data, but
the unique form in which it is expressed. In the USA, ACF as such has no
legal standing as a person, thus the group, assuming it could all assemble
to petition a court, could not likely successfully sue.
I have no idea what European courts would do with all this.
Having stated what seems to be a balanced view of the technical and issues,
I wish all concerned well, and only beg all of you now taking separate
paths to cooperate in some way to preserve, build and improve on the list
of excellent free programs.
It seems to me that it is feasible for several sites to present the same
information in different ways, as SOS suggests. I'm opposed to boycotts and
hostile rivalries. Let a thousand flowers bloom, but let them all be
friendly to one another. Time takes care of things nicely enough.
Zorro (aka Elefante)
excellent work -- I am particularly grateful for the CD initiative,
whatever the offlist ramifications -- and know Garrett's Web site. I don't
know these people personally.
Regretfully, I missed this discussion during my "birthday season." I think
I could have bridged the gap in understanding. It's clear to me that the
technical issue behind the whole brouhaha spins around equally valid, yet
different concepts of what a database is and how it should work with
respect to a Web site.
Susan contended she has a database and cited Quattro Pro, which I know and
love, and I understand perfectly well that what she has is an offline
database that can be transformed into HTML and posted as such.
Genna contended that an online database was required. I know of those, too,
and they function fine (I understand that Garrett's Web site was/is
essentially an online database).
How each method works is affects who has effective control of the
information and here there is a matter of trust (apparently lost for
reasons I don't need to know).
Susan's method relies on a database that is entirely independent of the
site setup and does not require any particular server-side specialized
software. The administrator can do it all offline and post it. It is
independent of whether a Web site host runs on Linux or Windows, whether it
runs on mysql or oracle or whatever. Control, in this instance, is entirely
in the hands of whomever has the most recently updated offline database. In
the setup that has prevailed until the present, this would mean Susan.
Genna's method relies on a database that is dependent on server-side
software dependent, no matter what client software is used offline. Not all
hosts offer all particular software. Moreover, if the online database is
passworded, then the person who owns the domain and has the contract with
the host effectively controls the information.
So it all depends on whom you trust. I think both Genna and Susan seem
trustworthy.
As to who owns the information legally, that is debatable. Under U.S.
copyright law, the author of original work owns whatever he or she creates
from the moment it is written, painted, etc. Courts have held
that compilations of data, such as the telephone directory, cannot be
copyrighted -- although the format in which such data are arranged can be
protected. So no one can photocopy the telephone directory and sell that.
Arguably, the author of the form in which the Pricelessware List is
presented can claim ownership to that. Each vote and each message posted on
the news group, however, legally belongs to each author. Not the data, but
the unique form in which it is expressed. In the USA, ACF as such has no
legal standing as a person, thus the group, assuming it could all assemble
to petition a court, could not likely successfully sue.
I have no idea what European courts would do with all this.
Having stated what seems to be a balanced view of the technical and issues,
I wish all concerned well, and only beg all of you now taking separate
paths to cooperate in some way to preserve, build and improve on the list
of excellent free programs.
It seems to me that it is feasible for several sites to present the same
information in different ways, as SOS suggests. I'm opposed to boycotts and
hostile rivalries. Let a thousand flowers bloom, but let them all be
friendly to one another. Time takes care of things nicely enough.
Zorro (aka Elefante)