[PL] Revised Pricelessware Review Procedures

[Semolina Pilchard]

Ok, do you think if we found enough people willing to help out that the
idea might work though?

In an ideal world. Problem is that reality intervenes.
Pricelessware, up to now, has survived very precariously through our
good fortune in having a succession of very able administrators, one
at a time. There's not much chance of creating an entire civil
service of responsible and capable volunteers who can consistently put
the time in, and that's what this proposal calls for.

Beyond the volunteer problem, there's also the nature of the medium.
At its very best, an unmoderated usenet group is a benign anarchy.
The superimposing of such very limited structures as we already have,
like a broad agreement on what freeware is, or the processes to select
Pricelessware, depends entirely on the cooperation of the mainly fluid
self-selection of people who choose to take part in the group. The
amount of discussion/argument that constantly goes on around these
topics show how fragile that cooperation is.

Putting in place a structure and a set of rules that wouldn't be
inappropriate in one of the lower levels of local government, which
this is, is just too unwieldy, I fear. It might work in an off-usenet
group or a mailing list but I think it's probably asking too much of
an everyday usenet group.

 

[Aaron]

berlin.de:

I got a headache from only reading the beginning of that elaborate and
over-worked proposal. I think Garrett should get into real politics,
starting a new party and rewriting the constitution or something.

I bet he could become the next president of Uganda or some other poor
country, they would just give up and let him run the country, nobody
would have the stamina to argue against him and all his ideas.

Too much bureaucracy.

Maybe, but all the proposal boils down essentially is, that someone who
is not associated with either of the websites, carry out the nomination
and voting process.

This I think is an excellent idea. As it is now, whenever either Garrett
or Susan tries to start some discussion or vote, the other side views
such attempts as a power grab. Hence all the discussion about voting, the
right to start a vote etc etc. Which in turn leads to more bureucracy.

Having a netural third party trusted by both to carry out such tasks
might in fact reduce bureaucracy.

 

[James]

<snip>

Please Garrett, you REALLY need to get yourself a life beyond Usenet. This
is an unmoderated newsgroup most of us frequent for a bit of fun & freeware
info, not your new civil service. It's in enough of a mess without an
injection of total seizure from your suggestion. Hopefully sanity will
prevail.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

5. Calling a Vote:

A. A call to vote should be properly labelled for the
group to see. If not, then any outcome will be voided.

With [Vote] in the header ?

B. Voting should be allowed to run for at least two
weeks (14 days) before it is closed and tallied.

C. A vote will only be considered valid if more than 50
unique voters have participated. If not, the vote is
pronounced void due to lack of interest.

Good idea.

D. No discussions will be allowed in the voting thread,
since all discussion should have been taken care of
in the pre-voting discussion thread.

Good idea, but you didn't follow that method yourself. With the PL
Slogan you didn't ask anyone what the options are that should have
been voted on. Many people preferred an option that you did not offer
them. There were essentially three options. You offered only two.

Regards, John.

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

 

[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.

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

I added a few more of the "unwritten rules": no games, no online sites.
.. . Have I forgotten any?

added a section on removing programs from the PL. . . info about
preparing program description. . . I would really like people to review
that and give me some feedback - there was a lot of confusion last year.
.. .

Other comments and proposed revisions too please.

TIA

The full text is below.

Susan

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

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

Games are not eligible for the Pricelessware List.

Online software (Webware) is not eligible for the Pricelessware List.

The software must be available for download.

Programs must have acceptable ware descriptions to be eligible for
nomination.
See the Ware Glossary for definitions of ware types.

The following ware types are acceptable for nomination:

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

The following ware types are not acceptable for nomination:

Abandonware (Warez Abandonware is not acceptable)
Adware:
CDWare
Commercial Software
Crippleware
Demo-ware
Malware
Nagware
Orphanware (Warez Orphanware is not acceptable)
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.

Programs descriptions should include the information shown in the Notes
on preparing program descriptions.

A separate thread will be used to submit program descriptions during the
nomination process.

Nomination Procedure

Programs that are eligible for nomination will be listed in the first
post in the Pricelessware Nominations thread. When programs descriptions
are submitted after the start of nominations verification of eligibility
for nomination will be posted in the nominations thread. Nominations of
ineligible programs will not be recognized.

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.

Removal Procedures

Programs are removed from the Pricelessware List. if they do not meet
the eligibility requirements. If it is learned that the program's ware
type is ineligible or it becomes ineligible the program is removed from
the Pricelessware List.. If a program becomes shareware and a "last
Freeware version" is not available for download the program is removed
from the Pricelessware List. If a program is not available for download
the program is removed from the Pricelessware List.

Notes on preparing program descriptions.

Copy the fields below. Add the program's description information after
the field. Copy additional fields as needed for the program description
(two file versions or a third link). If a program has both ZIP and EXE
versions include both. If a program has many versions (such as XnView)
include no more than two. If possible give the URL for a download page
(rather than a download link). Many sites offer multiple download
locations.and/or add-ons for the programs (language packs, plugins
etc.). List all ware types that apply. Note licensing information (open
source etc.) and restrictions (free for personal use) . If a field does
not appy note that information. The numbered fields are listed in the
order they occur in the program descriptions. Refer to the PL2004
Category pages for examples of descriptions. If you have questions about
what to include or need help finding the information post your questions
in the newsgroup.

CATEGORY:
SUBCATEGORY:
AUTHOR'S EMAIL ADDRESS (munged):

01 PROGRAM NAME:
02 WARE DESCRIPTION:
03 OS-WIN:
04 OS-NOTES:
05 OS-OTHER:
06 LANGUAGES:
07 DESCRIPTION AND NOTES
08 AUTHOR:
09 COMPANY:
10 LINK DESCRIPTION
11 LINK
12 FILE VERSION:
13 RELEASE DATE:
14 LANGUAGE
15 FILE NAME:
16 FILE SIZE:
17 LINK DESCRIPTION
18 LINK


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