Summary: What Makes a Good Post?

[Susan Bugher]

The thread was in June. I've been meaning to make a summary ever since .
.. .

I decided to try it as a web page. Comments?

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/posting.htm

I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:

[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam

Did I miss any?

Susan

 

[Tiger]

The thread was in June. I've been meaning to make a summary ever
since . . .

I decided to try it as a web page. Comments?

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/posting.htm

I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:

[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam

Did I miss any?

[AAU]? Ad-aware update?
[SBU]? Spy-bot update?

Dunno if these are conventions...or if they should be, cuz I generally
don't notice update posts.

--
Tiger

"Zero is where the fun starts
There is too much counting everywhere else."
- Hafiz

 

[Mick]

Hello Tiger,
You wrote on Fri, 15 Aug 2003 02:41:23 GMT:

[AAU]? Ad-aware update?
[SBU]? Spy-bot update?

Dunno if these are conventions...or if they should be, cuz I generally
don't notice update posts.

IMO, it would make more sense to use [ASU] as in Anti-Spyware Update because
adaware and spybot are only two anti-spyware programs out of many ACF users post
updates for.

 

[Mick]

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Thu, 14 Aug 2003 22:04:37 -0400:

I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:

[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam

Did I miss any?

Susan

If only this were true. I have seen plenty of "[OT?]", "OT", "OT - poss",
"OT:", and "half OT". Makes a mockery of message filters because you can't just
filter on "OT" (unless you never want to see messages with subjects like
*spybot* or *Other freeware lists* etc.). If ACF users truly want to use the
subject conventions you've laid out above, I suggest ACF users start flaming ppl
for using non-standard or modified conventions as I've listed because the bottom
line is - it ain't working.

In regards to the web page, I take it you intend creating a more informative and
straight to the point page sometime in the future rather than just leaving it as
a narrative?

 

[REMbranded]

The thread was in June. I've been meaning to make a summary ever
since . . .

I decided to try it as a web page. Comments?
http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/posting.htm
I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:
[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam
Did I miss any?

[AAU]? Ad-aware update?
[SBU]? Spy-bot update?

Maybe just [UPDATE] followed by the program name?

SpywareBlaster is another that is similar to SpyBot.

 

[DAN]

Hi Susan

Did I miss any?

[Alphabet Soup], maybe?

LOL. I like REMbranded's suggestion of [Update] followed by the app's name.

- - -

Frankly, as much as I appreciate the need for law and order in the group just
like anyone, and as much as we want to keep the group informative and spam-free
and all those good things, I have my doubts about letting the most vociferous
complainers dictate what others can write or not.

For what I can see, the most vocal censors are just driven by anal-retentiveness
and desire for control, and no amount of placating them will solve anything. If
we granted them what they demand, they'll only want more. (where in history did
I see this before? hmmm). For me, right now the complainers are much more of a
source of noise and a nuisance to the group than the "impurities" they purport
to censor out.


IMO except for spamming, let the posters post what they want. If one doesn't
like the output of a given poster, just plonk away. (No need to crow out about
it, BTW).
And for the crowd with anal retentive issues, the solution for them is either a
shrink or a laxative. Placating them is not a workable option.

- - -

I think it's been a while since I last expressed my appreciation for the great
contribution you and Genna make to the community. So there. I wish my schedule
would allow me to contribute to the PL with some reliability, but it ain't
likely in the short term. Which makes me appreciate your deeds even more.

DAN

 

[Susan Bugher]

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Thu, 14 Aug 2003 22:04:37 -0400:

I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:

[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam

Did I miss any?

Susan

If only this were true. I have seen plenty of "[OT?]", "OT", "OT - poss",
"OT:", and "half OT". Makes a mockery of message filters because you can't just
filter on "OT" (unless you never want to see messages with subjects like
*spybot* or *Other freeware lists* etc.). If ACF users truly want to use the
subject conventions you've laid out above, I suggest ACF users start flaming ppl
for using non-standard or modified conventions as I've listed because the bottom
line is - it ain't working.

I think one problem is that a fair number of people don't know what the
filters are or when they should use them - and there is no easy way to
find out. I'd like to see message filter info on the PL site and in the
FAQs - should help a little.

In regards to the web page, I take it you intend creating a more informative and
straight to the point page sometime in the future rather than just leaving it as
a narrative?

Wellllllll . . . no.

If the group likes the page I'll do a bit more formatting.

These are not *rules* - just tips - everybody has their own style of
posting.

IMO the post snippets are a good way to present that sort of topic. I'm
open to suggestions for a better way.

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/posting.htm

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

IMO except for spamming, let the posters post what they want.

I don't agree with that. This isn't alt.discuss.everything - I think
guidelines are valuable (the FAQs) - I think flames are sometimes
warranted - alas, the noise to signal ratio is going to be too high
either way - too much [OT] discussion or too much flaming . . .

I think it's been a while since I last expressed my appreciation for the great
contribution you and Genna make to the community. So there. I wish my schedule
would allow me to contribute to the PL with some reliability, but it ain't
likely in the short term. Which makes me appreciate your deeds even more.

Thank you for the compliments that were aimed my way - and thank you for
contributing to the newsgroup - good posts are the *most* important
part.

Susan

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Mick wrote:

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Thu, 14 Aug 2003 22:04:37 -0400:

I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:
[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam
Did I miss any?

Don't think so.


< snip >

One can filter on "OT". (OT) might be better though.

I think one problem is that a fair number of people don't know what the
filters are or when they should use them - and there is no easy way to
find out. I'd like to see message filter info on the PL site and in the
FAQs - should help a little.

< snip >

Good point. Okay, done the latter.

Is :

(AVU) Anti-virus update
(OT) Off-topic
(PL) Pricelessware list
*SPAM* Spam

okay with everyone ? For uniformity I suggest that JC, and others, use
(SPAM) for the last one ?

Comments ?

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/

 

[Loki Harfagr]

I decided to try it as a web page. Comments?

Still a clean page, thus it may not be related to
this group, or is it ?-°)

I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:

[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam

Did I miss any?

Yes, the most useful ( or shood a sey oozeefoob )

[RWAC] Ranting Without A Clue

prolly the must though piple an ze kuz wunt thunk tu ooze at ?

Meught ba rong ... mahbee


Oh well, it's defunutly hot tunat... Just back on electric liv%@^\~`

 

[Mick]

Hello John,
You wrote on Sat, 16 Aug 2003 10:12:44 +1000:

< snip >

One can filter on "OT". (OT) might be better though.

That was my point John - you could but you would miss out on any post that
contained the letters OT in the subject. Personally I prefer brackets as in
[OT] because parenthesis (...) are too commonly used in subjects. The use of
[...] as a filtering tool seems to conform to many listmail server conventions
as well.

 

[Susan Bugher]

Mick wrote:

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Thu, 14 Aug 2003 22:04:37 -0400:
I know alt.comp.freeware uses these message filters:
[AVU] anti-virus update
[OT] off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
[SPAM] spam
Did I miss any?

I think one problem is that a fair number of people don't know what the
filters are or when they should use them - and there is no easy way to
find out. I'd like to see message filter info on the PL site and in the
FAQs - should help a little.

Is :

(AVU) Anti-virus update
(OT) Off-topic
(PL) Pricelessware list
*SPAM* Spam

okay with everyone ? For uniformity I suggest that JC, and others, use
(SPAM) for the last one ?

Comments ?

Yikes, I didn't mean to *change* the spam post filter. Let's stay with
the existing filters - so people who use the filters don't have to make
changes.

[AVU] Anti-virus update
[OT] Off-topic
[PL] Pricelessware list
*SPAM* Spam

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

Hello Susan,

You wrote on Fri, 15 Aug 2003 13:42:50 -0400:

I would call them "ACF Posting Guidelines". It has more appeal ;-)



If you mean snippets are a good way to present that sort of topic in order to
get a group consensus so that you can produce a ACF posting guidance page, then
yes, I have to agree. Unfortunately, that's not the way I read it initially, so
apologies if this is the case. If on the other hand you meant to infer that
this would be the final guidance product, then, sorry, have to disagree here.
Snippets are great if you need a chronological and POV aspect on an issue. I
would make the assumption that any ACF user visiting that page is there to get
information and guidance and the less "fluff" they have to read through, the
quicker and more likely the chance of conformance, hence, a simple straight to
the point page would seem to work best (IMO) in this case.

Hello Mick,

IMO it is a POV page - it's not "ACF Posting Guidelines". The aim is to
present information about *what* information people like to see and
*why* that information is useful to them. Whether or not people follow
the advice should surely be up to them. The goal is to inform, not
command.

The advantage of the post snippets is that it's quite clear that each
piece of advice is one person's POV. The snippets achieve my immediate
goal -> make the information available.

I agree presenting the advice in a more compact - straight to the point
- format is a good idea.

IMO the way to achieve that goal is this: create a new version of "What
Makes a Good Post?" and post it for review and comment by the newsgroup.
I will be delighted if you or someone else does that. When the summary
has been *blessed* with a consensus I will put it on the web page in
place of the advice snippets.

Susan

 

[Mick]

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Sat, 16 Aug 2003 12:39:50 -0400:

IMO it is a POV page - it's not "ACF Posting Guidelines". The aim is to
present information about *what* information people like to see and
*why* that information is useful to them. Whether or not people follow
the advice should surely be up to them. The goal is to inform, not
command.

Oh, I agree totally, however, I would add that the goal is to inform and provide
guidance. While one ACF user should never command another (this is a good
thing), there are ways to entice posters into group conformance even in an
unmoderated group. Afterall, what's the point of providing this information if
it is simply ignored? Before someone flames me for this statement, let me add I
have never been one to agree with what should and shouldn't be posted in an
unmoderated group. IMO, you should be able to post anything of benefit to the
group so long as there is a subject indicator. This is not a restriction being
placed on anyone, it's just good netiquette for those of us on volume internet
plans (i.e.. pay for downloads per MB), and for those who wish to simply filter
what we want to see/download.

The advantage of the post snippets is that it's quite clear that each
piece of advice is one person's POV. The snippets achieve my immediate
goal -> make the information available.
Agreed.

I agree presenting the advice in a more compact - straight to the point
- format is a good idea.

IMO the way to achieve that goal is this: create a new version of "What
Makes a Good Post?" and post it for review and comment by the newsgroup.
I will be delighted if you or someone else does that. When the summary
has been *blessed* with a consensus I will put it on the web page in
place of the advice snippets.

I think there needs to be a few more hundred snippets before we could even begin
to think about anything like a consensus. Also, I note none of the posts with
filter suggestions seem to have made it to that page yet. Do you intend
including them or is that page just for advice on what makes a good post to the
PWL? IMO it's probably better that way as the ACF FAQs (both) should contain a
page on What makes a good ACF post (filters and all), not that PWL page.

For my part, I would like to see *all* filters placed within [...] simply
because it is then easier to identify and highlight a filter this way and
brackets are not normally part of everyday conversational writing so the chances
of a filter mis-match is significantly reduced. As to the filters themselves, I prefer:

[UPDATE] program : Program update (REMbranded's idea)
[OT] : Off-Topic
[OT?] : Possibly Off-Topic
[SPAM] : Spam / Spam reply
[FAQ] : ACF FAQ / Update (all versions)
[STATS] : Group Posting Statistics
[TROLL] : Says it all
[REQ] : Program required

[PWL] : Pricelessware List Update
[SFL] : Simtel Freeware List Update
[FWT] : FreewareWorld Team List Update
[SOS] : Son Of Spy List Update
[LTF] : Links To Freeware Update

I'm sure there are others, but these just come readily to mind.

As for a PWL post, IMO it should contain information in such a way as to make
the PWL updaters job easier and as fast as possible in that it should be just a
simple matter of cut and paste. Things I would like to see in a PWL post are:

CATEGORY:
TITLE:
VERSION:
DATE:
LICENSE:
OS:
SPECREQS: (Min RAM, addnl DLL's, etc.)
FILESIZE:
HOMEPAGE:
DL LINK:
DETAILS:

 

[Susan Bugher]

coming soon - a list of the four filters (added to the good post page).
I'll just list the message filters that are used now . . .

done

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/posting.htm

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Sun, 17 Aug 2003 12:34:34 -0400:

I tagged a short question onto my initial post asking if I had
remembered all of the common filters - a request for facts that turned
into a discussion.

This thread was *supposed* to be for *review* of the web page (not a
further discussion to be added to the web page). Threads do have a mind
of their own and often go in unanticipated directions.

Ok, but mind if I ask why only four? After all, isn't that page supposed to
contain snippets of all ACF users ideas, not just what's in place now?
Apologies if I have my wires crossed somewhere.

Ask away. Always.

a) it's not intended to be a discussion page

b) the four filters I listed have been discussed in the past and are in
common use (though perhaps not as common as we might wish). IMO
additional filters need to be discussed and agreed upon in the
newsgroup *before* they are listed on the web page.

c) the tips are just tips - but it *would* be very nice if the filters
were used by most people - they're not much help otherwise. I don't
think we should confuse things with filters that are *under discussion*.

d) FWIW: the tips were summarized *and* edited by yours truly (see the
original thread) (I left out all the good stuff) (Hi Tiger)

I do like your idea of adding a note to update posts when the program is
on the Pricelessware list. I think those posts are of special interest
to others - they certainly are of special interest to me.

Me too

We already use [PL] - I think [PLU] would be easier to remember than
[PWL]. I think I'll start using [PLU]. If that or [PWL] (or something
else) catches on we can add it to the filter list.

Agreed. Whichever is more suitable (I was just following a format of 3 letters)

note: IMO this is a *flag* - not a filter - so one *standard* way of
doing it isn't really needed.

Simply posting the updates is the main thing - but adding [PLU] or
similar would help me spot the PW programs (and I'd be in absolute
heaven if people looked at the current PL description and noted the
revisions that were needed).

Just a thought, but maybe an occasional post with an alphabetical list of
programs on the PL detailing name and version that ACF users could check might
help keep the process up-to-date?

This group would *not* like several hundred line posts from me on a
regular basis.

If I did that I might make it to the very top of the *Ways to Get
Flamed* list.

Trust me on this.

I would be happy to do a ONE TIME posting of a single spaced
alphabetical list that people could copy and use. Would anyone like
that?

I hope I've answered your questions in a way that makes sense to you and
others. If not, make more comments - ask more questions.

Susan

 

[Mick]

Hello Susan,
You wrote on Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:31:43 -0400:

Ask away. Always.

a) it's not intended to be a discussion page

No probs. Just ignore me as I sometimes have my head up my a...

b) the four filters I listed have been discussed in the past and are in
common use (though perhaps not as common as we might wish). IMO
additional filters need to be discussed and agreed upon in the
newsgroup *before* they are listed on the web page.
Agreed.

c) the tips are just tips - but it *would* be very nice if the filters
were used by most people - they're not much help otherwise. I don't
think we should confuse things with filters that are *under discussion*.
True.

d) FWIW: the tips were summarized *and* edited by yours truly (see the
original thread) (I left out all the good stuff) (Hi Tiger)

And I am sure you do a fine job ;-)

note: IMO this is a *flag* - not a filter - so one *standard* way of
doing it isn't really needed.

Flag is probably a better word for it. Filter tend to make ppl think of weeding
out rather than identifying.

This group would *not* like several hundred line posts from me on a
regular basis.

Ahh, but a perfect opportunity to use a flag and have them delete it if they are
not happy ;-)

If I did that I might make it to the very top of the *Ways to Get
Flamed* list.

Trust me on this.

I would be happy to do a ONE TIME posting of a single spaced
alphabetical list that people could copy and use. Would anyone like
that?

I hope I've answered your questions in a way that makes sense to you and
others. If not, make more comments - ask more questions.

Thanks.

 

[BillR]

Susan Bugher wrote:

<Snip>
Keeping track of latest versions or bad links or description
corrections is just the thing for another web page that allows each
poster to automatically add the information. Periodically (monthly?
quarterly? added to the FAQ announcement?) the changes could be posted
to the ng, if someone were willing to take that on. Otherwise, anyone
interested could easily navigate to the updates page and see the
changes. Anyone referencing the PL could also be directed to this
list "for the latest" info.

Such a page also might be a good place to provide a history of changes
(1 line summary, or at most 1 line per program entry changed). Also
good for the one line "latest version" list discussed above (updated
as needed/someone motivated?). And Susan would not become number 1 or
2 on the flame list for posting that periodically. (I want that spot!
HA).

I hope this would make the job of updating the PL info slightly
easier, as well as providing an additional minor service. It also
would eliminate a small number of posts.

BTW, including the last change date in each PL description is great.

BillR

 

[Susan Bugher]

Susan Bugher wrote:

I'm more than interested in this, and would love (as in agape) to see
this....

Done - posted as new thread: Pricelessware Alphabetical List

Susan

 

[Lance M Hillier, Sr]

Done - posted as new thread: Pricelessware Alphabetical List

Susan

Your Momma loves you, your Daddy loves you, I love you,
and soon the entire Pricelessware world will love you....
:-{}