Endless lists of software. in a.c.f

[Steve Stevenson]

I won't mention names or pseudonyms but I've noticed that there are
people here who post sheer endless numbers of what lookes like
recommendations of programs. However, as it turns out they have not
used most of them, not even downloaded the software or at least
visited homesites. If they had done so they would not heve mention
some of them. These people have absolutely nothing to say about the
software they list here.

Anyone can post endless numbers of programs he/she has not used,
simply by copying and pasting from websites, but why do that? Simply
by chance some will even be OK, or, in some instances, even very good.
But what's the point when we are not informed about home sites,
download sizes and user's (i.e. the poster's) experiences?

I suggest these people restrict themselves to recommendations of
programs they have actually used and know something about.
Anyone can google for freeware sound editors, file managers, clipboard
extenders, text editors etc. or visit freeware sites (with long
lists!). Postings from people we actually use the programs they
recommend are useful, particularly when the say why they prefer them
to other other similar software. Posting the names of endless numbers
of programs which were never even looked at by the poster is useless.

Sorry folks, had to post this.

Steve

 

[Tramp]

|I won't mention names or pseudonyms but I've noticed that there are
|people here who post sheer endless numbers of what lookes like
|recommendations of programs.

You ASSUME that they are recommendations

|However, as it turns out they have not
|used most of them, not even downloaded the software or at least
|visited homesites. If they had done so they would not heve mention
|some of them. These people have absolutely nothing to say about the
|software they list here.

Yes we do. We say that the software is there and can be downloaded.

|
|Anyone can post endless numbers of programs he/she has not used,
|simply by copying and pasting from websites, but why do that?

To inform people that there are programs out there that they might not
know about.

|Simply
|by chance some will even be OK, or, in some instances, even very good.
|But what's the point when we are not informed about home sites,
|download sizes and user's (i.e. the poster's) experiences?

Some programs no longer have home sites. Most programs sizes are there
next to the download link. As far as experiences, well if people only
posted about programs that they had used there would not be very many
posts as all.


|I suggest these people restrict themselves to recommendations of
|programs they have actually used and know something about.

Well I won't be changing the way I do things.

|Anyone can google for freeware sound editors, file managers, clipboard
|extenders, text editors etc. or visit freeware sites (with long
|lists!).

This true

|Postings from people we actually use the programs they
|recommend are useful, particularly when the say why they prefer them
|to other other similar software.

You're right, it is useful.

|Posting the names of endless numbers
|of programs which were never even looked at by the poster is useless.
|

In your opinion. Others like myself think otherwise.


|Sorry folks, had to post this.
|
|Steve
|

 

[OVACAM]

|I suggest these people restrict themselves to recommendations of
|programs they have actually used and know something about.
Well I won't be changing the way I do things.

Sure ! Please, Tramp, don't change, your posts are very helpful !

Cordialement,
Hervé LOTH
--
O.V.A.C.A.M.
Office de la vie associative et culturelle
d'Amiens Métropole
2, rue Flatters 80000 AMIENS
Tél : 03 22 92 50 59 / Fax : 03 22 92 89 46
site : www.ovacam.asso.fr

 

[Joe]

Well I won't be changing the way I do things.

Would it be too much trouble to regroup your suggestions in one or two posts
instead?

Joe

 

[Alan]

Actually no. But most people prefer it the way I am doing it now.

I honestly can't believe this is such a problem for people. I mean
what's the difference if I make 50 posts about different freeware, or
if I make 50 posts replying to 50 people who posted each posted 1
program?

Keep up with your current m.o. Tramp. It's quick & easy to identify
what's of possible interest by subject header alone, and to bypass the
rest. Good work!

 

[Joe]

Actually no. But most people prefer it the way I am doing it now.

I honestly can't believe this is such a problem for people. I mean what's
the difference if I make 50 posts about different freeware, or if I make
50 posts replying to 50 people who posted each posted 1 program?

I see your point. No offense meant.

Martin

 

[Maureen Goldman]

|Would it be too much trouble to regroup your suggestions in one or two posts
|instead?
Actually no. But most people prefer it the way I am doing it now.

I'd much prefer a grouping. In the majority of cases the utility name
doesn't mean enough to me to download the message. If the descriptions
were in a single message, I'd read them all.

 

[Boomer]

|Would it be too much trouble to regroup your suggestions in one or
|two posts instead?

Actually no. But most people prefer it the way I am doing it now.

I like the way you do it! Plus it's easier to find your individual
messages via Google's group search.

I honestly can't believe this is such a problem for people. I mean
what's the difference if I make 50 posts about different freeware,
or if I make 50 posts replying to 50 people who posted each posted
1 program?

Keep up the good work. Thanks many times over, Tramp!

 

[Mark]

Filters.

O come on, what a nonsense, you can use that as an argument in favor
of posting rubbish, insults, OT's and what have you. After al there
are "filters", aren't there.

Mark

 

[Keith Gardner]

Keep up the good work. Thanks many times over, Tramp!

Same here. I like the individual posts and I've harvested some useful
freeware from your info. Thanks.

Keith

 

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

I suggest these people restrict themselves to recommendations of
programs they have actually used and know something about.

The posts you you object to are on-topic and useful to many here. If
they don't have enough info to make them useful to you, just stop
reading them.

 

[Arne Anka]

I alt.comp.freeware, sa Boomer utan att tänka först:

I like the way you do it! Plus it's easier to find your individual
messages via Google's group search.

Keep up the good work. Thanks many times over, Tramp!

<AOL>
mE TWO
</AOL>

--
Arne Anka

Men det värsta är inte själva baksmällan,
den verkliga pärsen börjar när gårdagens
oundvikliga sanningar börjar rullas upp för en...

<http://starcruiser.dk/kosmos.html>

 

[msd13]

O come on, what a nonsense, you can use that as an argument in favor
of posting rubbish, insults, OT's and what have you. After al there
are "filters", aren't there.

Just the kind of argument somebody who would get filtered would make,
(and no I don't mean you). I've not used filters ever before but when
people just top post thing's like "ok! that's great!" to just about
anything any of the regulars say, over and over, it does get tempting.

 

[-½cut]

|Would it be too much trouble to regroup your suggestions in one or two
|posts instead?

Actually no. But most people prefer it the way I am doing it now.

I honestly can't believe this is such a problem for people. I mean
what's the difference if I make 50 posts about different freeware, or
if I make 50 posts replying to 50 people who posted each posted 1
program?

My only complaint is that I can't keep up with you Tramp! Keep up the
good works.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

I won't mention names or pseudonyms but I've noticed that there are
people here who post sheer endless numbers of what lookes like
recommendations of programs. However, as it turns out they have not

Might want to try something that I do. Using the example of Tramp, I
filter *new* posts by him, which avoids the kind of post you're
addressing (whether they're catalogs of 50 links or 50 individual,
smaller posts). By filtering that way, if anything therein generates
any real *discussion*, I see it (including Tramp's own responses in that
discussion).

 

[Tech Zero]

The voice of "msd13" drifted in on the cyber-winds,
from the sea of virtual chaos...

Filters.

I prefer "scoring", as in...

[^alt\.comp\.freeware$]
Score: =1000
From: Tramp|spammotel\.com
~References: (@.*)+

It makes finding Tramps posts so much easier when I check this
newsgroup on my day(s) off. };8)

 

[George Richards]

Well I won't be changing the way I do things.

Keep up the good work Tramp. I appreciate your regular and valuable
contribution to this group.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

I won't mention names or pseudonyms but I've noticed that there are
people here who post sheer endless numbers of what lookes like
recommendations of programs. However, as it turns out they have not
used most of them,

I suggest these people restrict themselves to recommendations of
programs they have actually used and know something about.

< snip >

I suggest that you learn how to killfile said people.


Regards, John.

 

[dszady]

I won't mention names or pseudonyms but I've noticed that there are
people here who post sheer endless numbers of what lookes like
recommendations of programs. However, as it turns out they have not
used most of them, not even downloaded the software or at least
visited homesites. If they had done so they would not heve mention
some of them. These people have absolutely nothing to say about the
software they list here.

Anyone can post endless numbers of programs he/she has not used,
simply by copying and pasting from websites, but why do that? Simply
by chance some will even be OK, or, in some instances, even very good.
But what's the point when we are not informed about home sites,
download sizes and user's (i.e. the poster's) experiences?

I suggest these people restrict themselves to recommendations of
programs they have actually used and know something about.
Anyone can google for freeware sound editors, file managers, clipboard
extenders, text editors etc. or visit freeware sites (with long
lists!). Postings from people we actually use the programs they
recommend are useful, particularly when the say why they prefer them
to other other similar software. Posting the names of endless numbers
of programs which were never even looked at by the poster is useless.

Programs get posted. Some of the adventurous try out what intrigues them.
People who DO try them can post their results in
Alt.Comp.Freeware.Discussion. That's what it is for isn't it.
Most of us lurk over there I assume.

 

[Vic Dura]

I won't mention names or pseudonyms but I've noticed that there are
people here who post sheer endless numbers of what lookes like
recommendations of programs. However, as it turns out they have not
used most of them, not even downloaded the software or at least
visited homesites.

So what? The information is still useful IMO.