PL: Change the PL Slogan or Not - Vote Here

[ubab ilagnab]

LOL

alas. . .

Minions seem to be in *very* short supply - ISTM almost everyone here
has opinions that are are all their own - sometimes two or three on the
same topic. . . IOW more opinions than NG participants. . .

Are minions an endangered species or are they just avoiding ACF?

Susan

Me Me Me Me Me Me Me Me Me Me Me Me
Pick Me
I will be your minion
Or even a maxion
Or a minioff if you so desire
Just pick Me
Or I may move this group to
alt.comp.corlissware

 

[Garrett]

you are >> maintaining the site and prefer to stay focused on
Windows, and the new site >> change the slogan and include other
operating systems.


Second try, sorry if this is a dupe...

That was entirely intentional Nicolaas, however the intent was to
remove all wedges. It was certainly not offered to drive them in, I
assure you.

This was not intended to be anything other than a vote. Personally I
plan on abiding by what the users of this group decide on this. Just
because I prefer to keep it as is, doesn't mean I won't go with what
the group says. That's not my job with the site.

The two sites share the reporting of the best Win freeware as it
stands now.

Other than that, there is no reason both sites mirror the exact same
content. I don't really think Garrett likes the idea and prefers to
stay with Windows freeware. I gave him my vote for that site, if a
dual solution is acceptable.

That is, give Garrett a vote of confidence to do what he wants to do.
Why not?

On the other hand I really think linux should be included in the
other site, so my vote is to include it there, along with other
projects that might be of general interest to the public and to the
group.

This was not a vote about any site at all. It was a vote in regards to
the slogan of the pricelessware list. When I posted this, did I say
that this had anything to do with any specific site? Did I even give
the impression it was aimed at any specific site? Did I say something
about it being related only to the list itself and not to be confused
with any specific site?

If the dual solution is not viable then my vote is simply to include
linux and other operating systems and programs.

A dual solution is not needed.

-Garrett

 

[Garrett]

ubab ilagnab wrote:

[snip]

Or I may move this group to
alt.comp.corlissware

I don't have a problem with that. ;-)

All in favor, say "Aye!"

-Garrett

 

[jo]

Or I may move this group to
alt.comp.corlissware

What's wrong with some of the other Corliss groups?

 

[REM]

This was not intended to be anything other than a vote. Personally I
plan on abiding by what the users of this group decide on this. Just
because I prefer to keep it as is, doesn't mean I won't go with what
the group says. That's not my job with the site.

I understand. Sometimes a vote is proposed and alternate solutions can become
viable after discussion. It's just tough to determine all real possibilities
when proposing a vote and sometimes better alternatives are offered.

I thought that might be the case here, but it looks like I was wrong. It looks
like:

"The best of the best of Freeware as determined by the readers of
alt.comp.freeware"

is the most popular choice at the moment by a pretty large margin.

This was not a vote about any site at all. It was a vote in regards to
the slogan of the pricelessware list. When I posted this, did I say
that this had anything to do with any specific site? Did I even give
the impression it was aimed at any specific site? Did I say something
about it being related only to the list itself and not to be confused
with any specific site?

No, you did not specify a site. I was trying to make a point that the sites are
related, but eventually will be differentiated as time goes on. It is not
necessary that all content is perfectly mirrored between the two sites, other
than the original link in reporting of the best Win freeware.

It is alarming to read some of the discourse offered in some of the responses.
The idea was to satisify as many individuals as is possible and hopefully allow
some of these bad feelings to heal. The degree of malcontent on personal levels
probably requires solutions on personal levels though.

 

[Garrett]

I understand. Sometimes a vote is proposed and alternate solutions
can become viable after discussion. It's just tough to determine all
real possibilities when proposing a vote and sometimes better
alternatives are offered.

I may have been a bit quick on pushing the vote, but I've seen how some
votes are run here and didn't want the group to miss out on something
this important.

I thought that might be the case here, but it looks like I was wrong.
It looks like:

"The best of the best of Freeware as determined by the readers of
alt.comp.freeware"

is the most popular choice at the moment by a pretty large margin.

I kind of agree that this one has become more of a focus than the one
with the word "OS" in it. But I think since the vote was about the
other two, it would not be fair to include this one now since others
already voted on the first two.

I think we should take the winner of this vote and put it up against
this one next.

-Garrett

 

[Trevor Frew]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:57:20 +0200, Henk de Jong

My vote is for this one too.

With kind regards,

I vote for that change, too. It doesn't mention operating
systems, nor potentially infringe trademarks, copyright, etc.

Trevor

 

[bambam]

I kind of agree that this one has become more of a focus than the one with
the word "OS" in it. But I think since the vote was about the other two,
it would not be fair to include this one now since others already voted on
the first two.

I think we should take the winner of this vote and put it up against this
one next.

So you are saying that 80% of us have wasted our time voting? Next time
think a bit harder about calling for votes without first having a
discussion period, so that we can actually decide what we are to vote on.
As far as I am concerned this vote is good enough.

 

[JoeA]

New slogan, Pricelessware, It's a free for all.:

 

[H.M.A. (Dick) Hazeleger]

I kind of agree that this one has become more of a focus than the one
with the word "OS" in it. But I think since the vote was about the
other two, it would not be fair to include this one now since others
already voted on the first two.

Now, Garrett, please be fair... did we have a chance to enter our own
suggestions? No, we didin't... there was a vote, period... During this
"vote" some of the regulars came up with ideas, to which people voted;
so, in fact, this vote was both a vote and a discussion. As such I
think that the readers of ACF have casted valid votes, whether it was
on one of the slogans suggested by you, or whether it was on one of the
slogans suggested by other regulars here.

It's my opinion that it wouldn't be fair to those, who brought the new
slogans into the discussion, to just ignore these, and I read from the
above that you plan to do just that! Now... why do I get a bitter taste
about all this? Perhaps because it doesn't sound 'very democratic'?

I think we should take the winner of this vote and put it up against
this one next.

IMHO, the vote, as it was done, is a perfectly legitimate one; and the
result seems clear to me, no "second round" necessary!

I hope I interpreted your post in the wrong way, if so please feel free
to correct me.

Regards to all,
Dick

 

[MLC]

_H.M.A. (Dick) Hazeleger_, domenica 22/ago/2004:

Now, Garrett, please be fair... did we have a chance to enter our own
suggestions? No, we didin't... there was a vote, period... During this
"vote" some of the regulars came up with ideas, to which people voted;
so, in fact, this vote was both a vote and a discussion. As such I
think that the readers of ACF have casted valid votes, whether it was
on one of the slogans suggested by you, or whether it was on one of the
slogans suggested by other regulars here.

It's my opinion that it wouldn't be fair to those, who brought the new
slogans into the discussion, to just ignore these, and I read from the
above that you plan to do just that! Now... why do I get a bitter taste
about all this? Perhaps because it doesn't sound 'very democratic'?


IMHO, the vote, as it was done, is a perfectly legitimate one; and the
result seems clear to me, no "second round" necessary!

I agree with you, Dick.
In the very beginning of the vote Mister Charlie, dszady and I wrote about
the new slogan not taken in consideration by Garrett, see e.g. my post
<[email protected]>.
Then the most voted for this last version.
I can't imagine why we'd have to vote again, if not to disrupt this NG even
more...

 

[FadedGlory]

So you are saying that 80% of us have wasted our time voting? Next time
think a bit harder about calling for votes without first having a
discussion period, so that we can actually decide what we are to vote on.
As far as I am concerned this vote is good enough.

I agree Bambam.. there is no need to call for another vote just because all
choices were not given to start with.. A write in vote should be accepted
now.

 

[Dewey Edwards]

Garrett wrote:

IMHO, the vote, as it was done, is a perfectly legitimate one; and the
result seems clear to me, no "second round" necessary!

Agreed, there is no need for the Blefuscu/Lilliput "winner" to be
further considered after this vote.

 

[BillR]

So you are saying that 80% of us have wasted our time voting? Next time
think a bit harder about calling for votes without first having a
discussion period, so that we can actually decide what we are to vote on.
As far as I am concerned this vote is good enough.

Garrett's poll (vote) was well intentioned but procedurally flawed.
This thread has only been up for a few days. I suspect many don't
visit several times a week. The vote also did not have a clear
duration. In addition, further discussion produced better choices.
Finally, some of us feel any vote was premature.

Garrett's poll also elicited widespread consideration of the slogan
and produced useful information. Let's make use of what we have
learned from that broad participation to confirm the concensus that
appears to have emerged.

I voted to keep the current slogan (with minor correction).
Nevertheless there appears to be a large enough majority to say there
is probably a concensus preference to change the slogan and perhaps on
what it should become.

Proposal
--------
The easiest way I can think of to determine a concensus (other than
having another standard vote) is to create three new related threads
that propose that concensus has been reached on a specific slogan.
The threads required to confirm the concensus are:
1. Negative votes on proposed slogan - for those who
a) have not yet voted and are opposed or
b) want to change their prior aye to nay.
2. Negative votes on proposed concensus - for those who feel that
a) the proposed slogan is _not_ the concensus of the group or
b) the duration of the poll is too short
c) the vote is so premature it should not be held,
d) etc.
3. Discussion - for those who want
a) to raise other issues such as new flaws or a better slogan or
b) to discuss the reasons for their current or prior vote.

If threads 1 .and 2. don't have many responses and 3. doesn't elicit a
major flaw, we can conclude that there is sufficient concensus to
adopt the proposed new slogan.

Advantages
----------
This approach will salvage much of the information from the prior vote
thread.

The number of additional posts will be minimized without everyone
voting again if concensus has been reached.

If concensus has not been reached, that will be clear as well. (I can
hope for lots of nays, can't I?)

Which slogan is being evaluated will be clear.

The vote thread will be separate from the discussion thread.

A specific time frame will be stated.

Note, the "concensus vote" threads should have a specific duration and
clearly stated purpose in the OP. (Also a plea to snip!)

Disadvantages
-------------
This proposal relies on this group being reasonably civil and
responsible as well as accepting this approach. (All three of these
are somewhat independent.)

Please keep personal attacks out of this thread and stay on topic.

BillR

 

[FadedGlory]

bambam <[email protected]> wrote in message

Garrett's poll (vote) was well intentioned but procedurally flawed.
This thread has only been up for a few days. I suspect many don't
visit several times a week. The vote also did not have a clear
duration. In addition, further discussion produced better choices.
Finally, some of us feel any vote was premature.

Garrett's poll also elicited widespread consideration of the slogan
and produced useful information. Let's make use of what we have
learned from that broad participation to confirm the concensus that
appears to have emerged.

I voted to keep the current slogan (with minor correction).
Nevertheless there appears to be a large enough majority to say there
is probably a concensus preference to change the slogan and perhaps on
what it should become.

Proposal
--------
The easiest way I can think of to determine a concensus (other than
having another standard vote) is to create three new related threads
that propose that concensus has been reached on a specific slogan.
The threads required to confirm the concensus are:
1. Negative votes on proposed slogan - for those who
a) have not yet voted and are opposed or
b) want to change their prior aye to nay.
2. Negative votes on proposed concensus - for those who feel that
a) the proposed slogan is _not_ the concensus of the group or
b) the duration of the poll is too short
c) the vote is so premature it should not be held,
d) etc.
3. Discussion - for those who want
a) to raise other issues such as new flaws or a better slogan or
b) to discuss the reasons for their current or prior vote.

If threads 1 .and 2. don't have many responses and 3. doesn't elicit a
major flaw, we can conclude that there is sufficient concensus to
adopt the proposed new slogan.

Advantages
----------
This approach will salvage much of the information from the prior vote
thread.

The number of additional posts will be minimized without everyone
voting again if concensus has been reached.

If concensus has not been reached, that will be clear as well. (I can
hope for lots of nays, can't I?)

Which slogan is being evaluated will be clear.

The vote thread will be separate from the discussion thread.

A specific time frame will be stated.

Note, the "concensus vote" threads should have a specific duration and
clearly stated purpose in the OP. (Also a plea to snip!)

Disadvantages
-------------
This proposal relies on this group being reasonably civil and
responsible as well as accepting this approach. (All three of these
are somewhat independent.)

Please keep personal attacks out of this thread and stay on topic.

BillR

My vote is and will remain 'The best of the best of Freeware as determined
by the readers of alt.comp.freeware'. If it gets counted fine. If not,
that is up to the powers that be. I will not be taking part in discussions
on something this simple that people will not accept the majority rule
without beating it to death.

 

[Garrett]

Now, Garrett, please be fair... did we have a chance to enter our own
suggestions? No, we didin't... there was a vote, period... During this
"vote" some of the regulars came up with ideas, to which people voted;
so, in fact, this vote was both a vote and a discussion. As such I
think that the readers of ACF have casted valid votes, whether it was
on one of the slogans suggested by you, or whether it was on one of
the slogans suggested by other regulars here.

It's my opinion that it wouldn't be fair to those, who brought the new
slogans into the discussion, to just ignore these, and I read from the
above that you plan to do just that! Now... why do I get a bitter
taste about all this? Perhaps because it doesn't sound 'very
democratic'?

IMHO, the vote, as it was done, is a perfectly legitimate one; and the
result seems clear to me, no "second round" necessary!

I hope I interpreted your post in the wrong way, if so please feel
free to correct me.

Regards to all,
Dick

If you had read some of my previous posts about the other suggested
slogan, you would have noted that I suggested that once this vote was
done, that the winner of this vote could be put up against the new
suggested slogan. That would at least give a chance for the new
suggestion.

Others are saying that it might be ok to accept the other one in the
already running vote since many have said they'd rather vote on that
instead.

I tread lighly now on that because I don't want to upset too many
people. I want to make sure that the end results are fair to everyone.

-Garrett

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Garrett's poll (vote) was well intentioned but procedurally flawed.
This thread has only been up for a few days. I suspect many don't
visit several times a week. The vote also did not have a clear
duration. In addition, further discussion produced better choices.
Finally, some of us feel any vote was premature.

I think your suggestion has merit, Bill. However, I think we're a
ways from deciding what else to do about the vote yet. Garrett has
suggested elsewhere that a vote should run for 14 days and if we use
that criterion we need to wait a bit.

Agreed that the vote is flawed in the ways you list above, but
nonetheless it has happened and many people have taken part. If it's
allowed to run through to the end of the 14-day period, the numbers
may be pretty decisive when they're tallied up.

After all, so far as I can see, there are only three proposed wordings
which have garnered support:

"The best of the best in Windows© Freeware as
determined by the readers of alt.comp.freeware."


"The best of the best in Freeware for Windows©
(and other OS) as determined by the readers of alt.comp.freeware."


"The best of the best in Freeware as determined by the readers of
alt.comp.freeware."

It shouldn't be impossible to determine which of these achieves a
majority. The result may be imperfect for the reasons outlined but we
can hardly ignore the votes of those who have taken the trouble to
cast them. If nothing else, this is a fine object lesson in the
inadvisibility of taking things to votes before every other means has
been exhausted and proposals have been hammered out and agreed upon.

We need to stand back from the votes and procedures for a while. This
is becoming a newsgroup of barrack-room lawyers and we're all being
drawn in. Any major decisions we make at the moment about group or
Pricelessware policy are likely to have to be re-thought in short
order, because we can't make sensible, lasting decisions in the
present heated atmosphere - we have plenty of evidence of that. Lets
conclude this particular vote and have a moratorium on the whole thing
for a while.

I commend your level-headedness, Bill, and your efforts to bring order
to the present confusion. For myself, I'm going to make no further
comment on Pricelessware, sites, rules, votes or any other aspect of
the current shenanigans unless it becomes even more bizarre than it
already is. Which is, I suppose, not unlikely.

Instead, I'm going back to enjoying freeware and I intend to resurrect
my killfile and I hope to be reading at least 50% less bad-tempered
quarrelling in a day or two.

 

[H.M.A. (Dick) Hazeleger]

If you had read some of my previous posts about the other suggested
slogan, you would have noted that I suggested that once this vote was
done, that the winner of this vote could be put up against the new
suggested slogan. That would at least give a chance for the new
suggestion.

Others are saying that it might be ok to accept the other one in the
already running vote since many have said they'd rather vote on that
instead.

I tread lighly now on that because I don't want to upset too many
people. I want to make sure that the end results are fair to
everyone.

-Garrett

Garrett... If *you* would have read my reply, you would have seen that
_that_ very part was in it, and that it was the part I posted about...
To me it reads as if (and you still don't deny that) you plan to count
the votes for the first two (yours) first and then let the winner take
it against the new one(s)... now, again: That is not fair, no matter
what you say about it!

Hope I could make my point clear this time

Regards to all!

Dick

 

[Klaatu]

Place your votes here people, keep the slogan the way it is, or change
it to the suggested one?

Leave as is.

 

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 19 Aug 2004, Garrett wrote

It has been suggested in a topic that was not titled properly,
that the slogan of Pricelessware be changed from:


"The best of the best in Windows© Freeware as
determined by the readers of alt.comp.freeware."


to:


"The best of the best in Freeware for Windows©
(and other OS) as determined by the readers of alt.comp.freeware."


Let's not bury this important thing like the site move, let us
allow all the users here have the opportunity to voice their
opinion on this. After all, it should be determined by the readers
of alt.comp.freeware, and not just a small handful of people who
have a problem with being open with voting on things like this

Place your votes here people, keep the slogan the way it is, or
change it to the suggested one?

Slogans with footnotes (or parentheses) -- or dashes -- are kind of
lame.

If it's going to include non-Windows programs, just drop all references
to any OS -- "the best Freeware, as determined..."