[PL] Revised Pricelessware Review Procedures

[Susan Bugher]

Revised Pricelessware Review Procedures

The main goal of this revision is to furnish a *complete* description of
"da rules" that govern the pricelessware selection process. The aim is:

- to aid newbies who have not participated in a PL vote
- to create a handbook to assist future "point-persons"
- to minimize conflicting interpretations of "da rules" during the

Pricelessware selection process

Please review and comment on the proposed procedures. We have ample time
for discussion before the start of the PL2005 selection process. The
Procedures web page will be updated to reflect changes that are agreed
upon in this discussion. See:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/PL-Procedures.htm

Susan

****************************

Pricelessware Review Procedures

PRELIMINARY - FOR DISCUSSION

Timetable for the 2005 vote.

October 1 - October 28, 2004 - Nominations And Discussion (4 Weeks)
October 29 - November 4, 2004 - Voting (1 Week)
November 5, 2004 - Vote Results Posted
November 6, 2005 - Preliminary Pricelessware List Posted
November 7 - November 13, 2004 - Final Selection Discussion (1 Week)
November 14, 2004 - Final Pricelessware List Posted

Criteria for Selection

The program should be one of the best Freeware programs available. The
Pricelessware List is a compilation of the favorite Freeware programs of
the readers of alt.comp.freeware. The goals of the Pricelessware List do
NOT include selecting programs to fit every subcategory. The programs
picked are not meant to be an exhaustive list of the best available
Freeware, but rather an answer to the often asked "which _____ is best?"

Eligibility for Nomination

See the Ware Glossary for definitions of ware types.
The following ware types are acceptable for nomination:

Freeware
Abandonware (non-Warez)
Betaware
Donationware
Liteware
Orphanware (non-Warez)
Registerware
Requestware

The following ware types are not acceptable for nomination:

Adware:
CDWare
Commercial Software
Crippleware
Demo-ware
Malware
Nagware
Shareware
Spyware
Trialware
Warez

The glossary's ware descriptions don't cover all situations. In special
cases programs may be placed on a Ware Ballot to determine if the
program's ware description is acceptable to newsgroup participants. The
Ware ballot is used only to determine elegibility. A two-thirds majority
in favor of acceptance is required for a program to be eligibile for the
Pricelessware List. Voting on Pricelessware and Ware Ballots is done in
the same time period.

Program Descriptions

Program descriptions must be verified for new nominations (programs that
are not on the current Pricelessware List) before a program can be
nominated.

Programs descriptions may be submitted informally in the month preceding
the start of nominations. Submitting descriptions prior to the start of
nominations will greatly facilitate the nominating process.

A separate thread will be used to submit program descriptions during the
nomination process. Verification of eligibility for nomination will be
posted in the nominations thread. Nominations of ineligible programs
will not be recognized.

Nomination Procedure

Programs that are eligible for nomination will be listed in the first
post in the Pricelessware Nominations thread.

Nominations are made by posting the names of the programs you wish to
nominate/second.

Voting Procedure

A program must be nominated and seconded to be placed on the ballot.
These programs will be listed in the first post in the Pricelessware
Voting thread.

Ballots are cast by posting the names of the programs you wish to vote
for. Multiple ballots are permitted. If you wish to vote for additional
programs after your first vote is cast you may cast another ballot with
the names of your additional choices.

You may not withdraw a vote once it has been cast. Write in votes will
not be recognized.

Preliminary Selection procedure

Ware ballots are counted first. Programs that lose on this ballot are
removed from further consideration.

Votes are the primary consideration in the Pricelessware selection
process.. Programs that received the most votes are selected first. A
limited number of programs are selected for a category. A "minimum" vote
count is chosen to avoid "overfilling" categories (more than 3-4
selections). All programs that received this "minimum" number of votes
are selected.

Secondary consideration is given to subcategories. Pricelessware
selections are made in unfilled subcategories to broaden the range of
programs. Only one selection is made in a subcategory. Tie votes will be
discussed in the final selection thread. When several unfilled
subcategories have similar programs one program is selected and the
other subcategories are eliminated.. A second "minimum" is chosen to
minimize the disparity in vote count between selections in the high vote
subcategories and these selections in the less popular subcategories.
Subcategories are eliminated when they do not have any programs that
received the required minimum number of votes.

Final Selection Procedure

This is the "juried" part of the Pricelessware selection process. The
group as a whole has more expertise than one person.

After the preliminary Pricelessware List selections are made the list is
presented to acf participants for review. The final Pricelessware List
is determined by this discussion.

If you feel that a program of exceptional merit has been overlooked post
a request for inclusion.
If you feel that a program is not a good choice for the Pricelessware
List post your objections.

****************************

 

[Dan Goodman]

Revised Pricelessware Review Procedures

The main goal of this revision is to furnish a *complete* description of
"da rules" that govern the pricelessware selection process. The aim is:

- to aid newbies who have not participated in a PL vote
- to create a handbook to assist future "point-persons"
- to minimize conflicting interpretations of "da rules" during the

Pricelessware selection process

Looks okay to me.

 

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

Program descriptions must be verified for new nominations
(programs that are not on the current Pricelessware List) before a
program can be nominated.

Verification means that at least one poster other than the one
providing the description has vouched for the description's accuracy,
right?

Programs descriptions may be submitted informally in the month
preceding the start of nominations. Submitting descriptions prior
to the start of nominations will greatly facilitate the nominating
process.

A separate thread will be used to submit program descriptions
during the nomination process. Verification of eligibility for
nomination will be posted in the nominations thread. Nominations
of ineligible programs will not be recognized.

Will there be a third thread for discussion, or will discussion take
place in those two threads?

 

[Susan Bugher]

Verification means that at least one poster other than the one
providing the description has vouched for the description's accuracy,
right?

more things to spell out. . .

The intent is to have the descriptions posted. That will give others a
chance to comment, mention any additional info that's needed (additional
ware type etc.) or suggest a different version or. . .

I'll do the basic verification. I'll create a small web page for each
program, *verify* that the name is correct, the links works etc. etc.
These web pages will be linked to the Program Info pages. They'll also
be linked to the Nomination page.

Will there be a third thread for discussion, or will discussion take
place in those two threads?

ISTM we should have one discussion thread for *each* Category page, as
in year's past. (something else to spell out)

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

REPOST WITH REVISIONS AND COMMENTS
**********************************

There has been little discussion of "da rules". If changes are needed
let's make them now. Cries of outrage after the fact *may* fall on deaf
ears. . . You have been warned. . .

This slogan has been used for Pricelessware for some time now:

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

IMO that should be changed as follows:

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

That would better describe the present reality of PL programs. for
example, Debian is not "Windows© Freeware". . .

A couple of things that haven't been added to "da rules" yet:

These are "paired" programs:

Gravity and Super Gravity
Outlook-Quotefix and OE-Quotefix
VNC and TightVNC

In years past the votes for these programs have been combined during the
selection process. Combining the programs into one description would be
difficult. OTOH combining the names on the ballot *is* possible and IMO
desirable.

GhostScript and GSView (GhostView) *are* combined into a single
description (there are no other combined program descriptions). GSView
is Nagware - it is not acceptable for renomination under the proposed
Pricelessware Review Procedures.

Comments please.

Susan

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Revised Pricelessware Review Procedures

The main goal of this revision is to furnish a *complete* description of
"da rules" that govern the pricelessware selection process. The aim is:

- to aid newbies who have not participated in a PL vote
- to create a handbook to assist future "point-persons"
- to minimize conflicting interpretations of "da rules" during the
Pricelessware selection process

Please review and comment on the proposed procedures. We have ample time
for discussion before the start of the PL2005 selection process. The
Procedures web page will be updated to reflect changes that are agreed
upon in this discussion. See:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/PL-Procedures.htm

Susan

****************************

Pricelessware Review Procedures

PRELIMINARY - FOR DISCUSSION

Timetable for the 2005 vote.

October 1 - October 28, 2004 - Nominations And Discussion (4 Weeks)
October 29 - November 4, 2004 - Voting (1 Week)
November 5, 2004 - Vote Results Posted
November 6, 2005 - Preliminary Pricelessware List Posted
November 7 - November 13, 2004 - Final Selection Discussion (1 Week)
November 14, 2004 - Final Pricelessware List Posted

Criteria for Selection

The program should be one of the best Freeware programs available. The
Pricelessware List is a compilation of the favorite Freeware programs of
the readers of alt.comp.freeware. The goals of the Pricelessware List do
NOT include selecting programs to fit every subcategory. The programs
picked are not meant to be an exhaustive list of the best available
Freeware, but rather an answer to the often asked "which _____ is best?"

Eligibility for Nomination

Programs must be *available* for download.

The following ware types are acceptable for nomination (See the Ware
Glossary for definitions of ware types.):

Freeware
Abandonware (non-Warez)
Betaware
Donationware
Liteware
Orphanware (non-Warez)
Registerware
Requestware

The following ware types are not acceptable for nomination:

Adware:
CDWare
Commercial Software
Crippleware
Demo-ware
Malware
Nagware
Shareware
Spyware
Trialware
Warez

The glossary's ware descriptions don't cover all situations. In special
cases programs may be placed on a Ware Ballot to determine if the
program's ware description is acceptable to newsgroup participants. The
Ware ballot is used only to determine elegibility. A two-thirds majority
in favor of acceptance is required for a program to be eligibile for the
Pricelessware List. Voting on Pricelessware and Ware Ballots is done in
the same time period.

Program Descriptions

Program descriptions must be verified for new nominations (programs that
are not on the current Pricelessware List) before a program can be
nominated. When a description is posted revisions may be proposed by
others for discussion. Verification will be done by the point person.
(Verification means checking that the description is complete, the links
work etc.)

Programs descriptions may be posted informally in the month preceding
the start of nominations. Submitting descriptions prior to the start of
nominations will greatly facilitate the nominating process.

A separate thread will be used to submit program descriptions during the
nomination process. Verification of eligibility for nomination will be
posted in the nominations thread. Nominations of ineligible programs
will not be recognized.

Nomination Procedure

Programs that are eligible for nomination will be listed in the first
post in the Pricelessware Nominations thread. Programs that become
eligible later will be noted in the same thread.

Nominations are made by posting "I nominate:" or "I second:" followed by
the names of the programs you wish to nominate/second.

Discussion Procedure

A separate thread will be used for each Category:

BUSINESS-HOME
DESKTOP
FILE UTILITIES
GRAPHICS
INTERNET
MULTI-MEDIA
ORGANIZERS
PROGRAMMING
SECURITY
SYSTEM UTILITIES
TEXT
WEB DESIGN

Voting Procedure

A program must be nominated and seconded to be placed on the ballot.
These programs will be listed in the first post in the Pricelessware
Voting thread.

Ballots are cast by posting the names of the programs you wish to vote
for. Multiple ballots are permitted. If you wish to vote for additional
programs after your first vote is cast you may cast another ballot with
the names of your additional choices.

You may not withdraw a vote once it has been cast. Write in votes will
not be recognized.

Preliminary Selection procedure

Ware ballots are counted first. Programs that lose on this ballot are
removed from further consideration.

Votes are the primary consideration in the Pricelessware selection
process.. Programs that received the most votes are selected first. A
limited number of programs are selected for a category. A "minimum" vote
count is chosen to avoid "overfilling" categories (more than 3-4
selections). All programs that received this "minimum" number of votes
are selected.

Secondary consideration is given to subcategories. Pricelessware
selections are made in unfilled subcategories to broaden the range of
programs. Only one selection is made in a subcategory. Tie votes will be
discussed in the final selection thread. When several unfilled
subcategories have similar programs one program is selected and the
other subcategories are eliminated.. A second "minimum" is chosen to
minimize the disparity in vote count between selections in the high vote
subcategories and these selections in the less popular subcategories.
Subcategories are eliminated when they do not have any programs that
received the required minimum number of votes.

Final Selection Procedure

This is the "juried" part of the Pricelessware selection process. The
group as a whole has more expertise than one person.

After the preliminary Pricelessware List selections are made the list is
presented to acf participants for review. The final Pricelessware List
is determined by this discussion.

If you feel that a program of exceptional merit has been overlooked post
a request for inclusion.
If you feel that a program is not a good choice for the Pricelessware
List post your objections.

****************************

 

[REM]

Susan Bugher <[email protected]> wrote:

REPOST WITH REVISIONS AND COMMENTS
**********************************

There has been little discussion of "da rules". If changes are needed
let's make them now. Cries of outrage after the fact *may* fall on deaf
ears. . . You have been warned. . .

I see I'm not the only one typing out long posts today.

Everything looks good to me, especially the last sentence below. If some people
have good luck and others bad, the program should be checked further by everyone
who has the time to install it for a spin.

 

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

This slogan has been used for Pricelessware for some time now:

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

IMO that should be changed as follows:

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

Should be Windows® ( &reg; ), not Windows©. The abbreviation "OS" always
scans as singular for me, so the parenthetical looks awkward to my eyes.
But "operating Systems" is a bit long to stick in a slogan. Maybe:

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

The following ware types are acceptable for nomination (See the
Ware Glossary for definitions of ware types.):

Maybe good to add the URI to the boilerplate for this.
<http://pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.htm>

 

[jo]

Should be Windows® ( &reg; ), not Windows©. The abbreviation "OS" always
scans as singular for me, so the parenthetical looks awkward to my eyes.
But "operating Systems" is a bit long to stick in a slogan. Maybe:

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

Or simply:

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

 

[Jack D. Russell, Sr.]

======================================================================
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <[email protected]>
* Newsgroup: alt.comp.freeware
* Reply to: All; "Susan Bugher" <[email protected]>
* Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:12:31 -0500 GMT
* Subj: Re: [PL] Revised Pricelessware Review Procedures
======================================================================

SB>REPOST WITH REVISIONS AND COMMENTS
SB>**********************************

SB>There has been little discussion of "da rules". If changes are
SB>needed let's make them now. Cries of outrage after the fact
SB>*may* fall on deaf ears. . . You have been warned. . .

SB>This slogan has been used for Pricelessware for some time now:

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

SB>IMO that should be changed as follows:

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


[Sorry, skipped]

....and the group has how long to decide this issue? ...and who has
decided and seconded that there is a need to change the Pricelessware
slogan? ...and the other listed issues? Are there no procedures for
calling for a vote or discussions on UN/needed/wanted changes to your
incarnation of the Pricelessware group site, and time limits for doing
same? Wouldn't want any vagueness or doubt injected into the process,
you know.

 

[Garrett]

REPOST WITH REVISIONS AND COMMENTS
**********************************

There has been little discussion of "da rules". If changes are needed
let's make them now. Cries of outrage after the fact may fall on deaf
ears. . . You have been warned. . .

This slogan has been used for Pricelessware for some time now:

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

IMO that should be changed as follows:

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

That would better describe the present reality of PL programs. for
example, Debian is not "Windows© Freeware". . .

I feel that it should not be changed, and that we should get back to
the original intent of Pricelessware, and that is, the best freeware
for Windows Systems. Including Linux based systems as part of the
listing is not what Pricelessware was intended for. I feel that if the
intent of the list is changed, then we are not doing the list justice
at all and Pricelessware will no longer be what is.

If you want to start a pricelessware list for other systems, then keep
them seperate so that users are able to get through what's already
listed and not have to fight through software for other systems such as
linux.

A couple of things that haven't been added to "da rules" yet:

These are "paired" programs:

Gravity and Super Gravity
Outlook-Quotefix and OE-Quotefix
VNC and TightVNC

I personally have no issues with paired listings. Not sure it would be
good to pair them up, or leave them as seperate items.

In years past the votes for these programs have been combined during
the selection process. Combining the programs into one description
would be difficult. OTOH combining the names on the ballot is
possible and IMO desirable.

[snip]

-Garrett

 

[burnr]

REPOST WITH REVISIONS AND COMMENTS
**********************************

This slogan has been used for Pricelessware for some time now:

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

IMO that should be changed as follows:

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

That would better describe the present reality of PL programs. for
example, Debian is not "Windows© Freeware". . .

Hadn't thought about it before, but since acf is about "freeware" and
flavors other than Windows are on topic for the group, I'm in favor of
dropping reference to any OS and as jo suggested...best in Freeware as
determined...sounds good to me.

I think Windows is the dominant OS of group participants and of course
Windows freeware dominates the list. Should times change and another OS
become the majority OS of the group (and internet), then the PL would
naturally evolve into a list dominated by that OS. I've always thought of
the PL as representing the best freeware that is the most useful for the
most users. Right now, that's Windows, but may not be that way forever.

A couple of things that haven't been added to "da rules" yet:

Looks good to me.

 

[dszady]

Or simply:

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

Seconded.

 

[Roger Johansson]

Seconded.

I agree too.
Maybe it is time to start preparing a Linux section of Pricelessware.

And maybe the Linux section should be handled by somebody else than our
web designers.

Reasons: It is already a big job to take care of the windows section.
Our current web designers do not know much about Linux.
It might be better to get a Linux user to handle the Linux section of
Pricelessware.

 

[Roger Johansson]

Maybe it is time to start preparing a Linux section of Pricelessware.

And maybe the Linux section should be handled by somebody else than our
web designers.

Reasons: It is already a big job to take care of the windows section.
Our current web designers do not know much about Linux.
It might be better to get a Linux user to handle the Linux section of
Pricelessware.

Considering that practically all Linux software is freeware it is
probably not meaningful to talk about Linux freeware, it is better
concentrate on the priceless aspect.

If we would create a pricelessware list for Linux it would be a
selection of the best programs that are available.
Or about very good but less known programs.

The best common programs are already included in many distros so I don't
see much reason to announce such programs.
Or is it?

I can go to myself and ask: What do I want to read about in acf in the
future, when I am using Linux?

I want to read about programs which are not normally included in the
standard distros, and I want to read about special distros.

Maybe it is best to continue as before, creating a pricelessware list
for windows and accept that there is more and more Linux talk in the
newsgroup also.

Later we can see clearer what needs the Linux users have and we can
adjust the way acf works.

 

[Susan Bugher]

@corp.supernews.com:

Hadn't thought about it before, but since acf is about "freeware" and
flavors other than Windows are on topic for the group, I'm in favor of
dropping reference to any OS and as jo suggested...best in Freeware as
determined...sounds good to me.

I think Windows is the dominant OS of group participants and of course
Windows freeware dominates the list. Should times change and another OS
become the majority OS of the group (and internet), then the PL would
naturally evolve into a list dominated by that OS. I've always thought of
the PL as representing the best freeware that is the most useful for the
most users. Right now, that's Windows, but may not be that way forever.

I like Jo's suggestion too.

Due to popular demand we've been listing non-Windows OS that PW apps
can run on for the last couple of years. It seems to me that fits in
well with the discussions that occur in ACF.

Apps that are *just* for Linux might not fare too well now in the PL
selection process but (as you said) that could change in the future.

Looks good to me.

Thanks for the feedback.

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

Maybe it is time to start preparing a Linux section of Pricelessware.

We have some non-Windows apps on the list now. We also have a fair
number of apps that come in Windows, Mac and Linux flavors. My feeling
is it would be better to wait and create a *separate* Linux section when
there is a demonstrated need.

Susan

 

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

We have some non-Windows apps on the list now.

Other than a couple of DOS apps, and of course Debian, I don't see any
that won't run in Windows. Oh, and memtest86, which runs without
loading an OS. All of these are useful to Windows users, which I
always thought was a principle of the PL, represented in the slogan.

 

[Susan Bugher]

I feel that it should not be changed, and that we should get back to
the original intent of Pricelessware, and that is, the best freeware
for Windows Systems. Including Linux based systems as part of the
listing is not what Pricelessware was intended for. I feel that if the
intent of the list is changed, then we are not doing the list justice
at all and Pricelessware will no longer be what is.

I think the PL should continue to *evolve* in whatever direction
newsgroup participants feel is appropriate.

This is a discussion of "da rules". If you think new rules are needed
propose them. No objections were made when Debian was nominated and at
present there is no rule *prohibiting* the nomination of non-Windows
programs.

The list has a few non-Windows programs and many more that run on
Windows *and* other operating systems. Newsgroup participants asked for
info about PL apps that run on Linux and other OS. That information is
shown on the Pricelessware pages (at pricelesswarehome.org anyway, I'm
not sure about your pages).

I like this suggestion for the PL slogan: "The best of the best in
Freeware as determined by the readers of alt.comp.freeware".

It's simpler and more accurate.

If you want to start a pricelessware list for other systems, then keep
them seperate so that users are able to get through what's already
listed and not have to fight through software for other systems such as
linux.

Please do not extropolate. If that's what I wanted I would have said so.

I suggested a change in the Pricelessware *slogan* to make it more
*accurate*.

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

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

SB>IMO that should be changed as follows:

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

...and the group has how long to decide this issue? ...and who has
decided and seconded that there is a need to change the Pricelessware
slogan? ...and the other listed issues? Are there no procedures for
calling for a vote or discussions on UN/needed/wanted changes to your
incarnation of the Pricelessware group site, and time limits for doing
same? Wouldn't want any vagueness or doubt injected into the process,
you know.

Hi Jack,

I try to follow previous precedent. I haven't found thread(s) about a
formal discussion/vote etc. before adopting the present slogan. Do you
have a URL?

Meanwhile I'll continue to seek a group *consensus* on this in the
friendly informal fashion that *usually* works so well in ACF. . .

Susan

 

[Garrett]

I think the PL should continue to evolve in whatever direction
newsgroup participants feel is appropriate.

That is correct, and you asked, and I answered with my thought on this.
I am part of this newsgroup, so please do not act like what I am saying
is not of any value to this. Don't shut me down just because you
didn't like my opinion on this. If the members of the group agree with
me, then the slogan will remain the same.

This is a discussion of "da rules". If you think new rules are needed
propose them. No objections were made when Debian was nominated and
at present there is no rule prohibiting the nomination of non-Windows
programs.

If this was a discussion of "da rules", then you should not have said
this:

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

IMO that should be changed as follows:

If you want to discuss the rules, then please avoid making new
suggestions.

I will be objecting to Debian this year.

The list has a few non-Windows programs and many more that run on
Windows and other operating systems. Newsgroup participants asked for
info about PL apps that run on Linux and other OS. That information
is shown on the Pricelessware pages (at pricelesswarehome.org anyway,
I'm not sure about your pages).

I like this suggestion for the PL slogan: "The best of the best in
Freeware as determined by the readers of alt.comp.freeware".

Just above, you shut me down for disagreeing with your suggestion
because you said your post was about "da rules", but again, you're
making a suggestion that the slogan be changed. How does this relate
to "da rules"? Am I misreading or misunderstanding this?

I don't agree with your suggestion. The list was from the start
intended for Windows software. Your assumption that this thread was
about rules is fine, except that you are not stating a rule when you
yourself are making suggestions that we remove windows from the slogan
and add non-windows software to the list. I merely responded with my
opinion that this may not be a good idea. No need for running me
through the coals here.

It's simpler and more accurate.


Please do not extropolate. If that's what I wanted I would have said
so.

You said you wanted to put linux software in the list, I suggested that
they be kept seperate. Please don't make this all into something that
it's not. You make some suggestions, I only responded. I do see
though, that those who agreed with you were thanked for their input,
but because I disagreed, you have.... Well, let's just say you didn't
seem to be quite appreciative of my post. And I do believe I was more
than respectful and mindful in my post.

I suggested a change in the Pricelessware slogan to make it more
accurate.

About 90+ % of the list is Windows software. Changing the slogan would
not be more accurate at all. I disagree.

-Garrett