{PL] Small suggestions for Pricelessware.Org

[dszady]

[...]
It's just as much your list as mine, Susan's, Genna's and even that
Whacky Dszady who's currently out for my skull on a silver platter.

[...]
Take it easy. No skull. No platter. I guess I should have made it clear that
I just had escaped from the state mental ward and had some spare time on my
hands.
If you read it again you will see nothing personal in there.

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Heh. You obviously missed out on the PL 'cateogory debates' last year.
Susan asked for input, but had very strong opinions of her own, and in the
end, largely acted on them. And that was her perogative. She was more
laissez faire about some things, but when it came to which programs
belonged in which categories, that was a big thing for her. A the
webmaster, that was her right. She had the clout to act on her own
preferences, when those own preferences were strong. Garret has the exact
same leeway. It's one of the perks of the job.

If there are perks of the job, they lie in the area of graphics and
the technicalities of site construction. Not that I would
characterise that as a perk. It's just work

There's no perk of the job that allows the webmaster to override the
wishes of the group. No webmaster before Garrett has ever felt the
need for one. There's a vast difference between Susan making a
practical choice about the organisation of the site in the absence of
requested input and Garrett substituting his opinion for that of the
group in the software definitions.

For the sake of peace in the group I would be tempted to let it go.
After all, Pricelesswarehome.org will reflect the group's decisions
regardless of what Pricelessware.org becomes.

The reason I feel I cannot do that, that I must continue to annoy the
group with my concerns is this: many, if not most of those who consult
and use Pricelessware arrive there not from a.c.f but from search
engines or by word-of-mouth advice. Pricelessware.org is the site
they will be led to and they will be poorly served if it is allowed to
become something other than a true reflection of the group's opinions
and wishes.

We have something good here; let's not allow it to wither on the vine.

 

[jo]

Again, as usual, your snibbling brings nothing of value to the
discussion. Thanks for being consistant.

At least I'm trying to do something to help.. What are you doing to
help?

My post was a bit unnecessary; I apologise.

 

[Garrett]

Please note: Since Ben continues to make this a personal issue with
me, I am now going to return the favor to him and treat him as treats
me and other members of this group.

If you're not in the mood to see Ben get a little roughed up in this
thread, then please disregard this post and move to the message.

Sorry for the interruption......

-Garrett


Ben Cooper wrote:

[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]

I did read the post, Garrett. Don't be condescending.

Ben, I'm not, But you're seriously lacking something here. I just
can't believe that you can't see the issues at all.

A program such as MultiRes can't be in the "wrong" location if it's
in the location that everyone voted it in.

OMG! Are you a complete idiot?! Yes it can if people are not being
informed well enough about what type of program it is, what it does and
where it belongs. And it can be wrong if nobody stands up to inform
them about where it should be placed.

In summary, I propose clarifying the subcategory name,

moving[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
it. You must be seeing something into this that I do not see.

Maybe it was the part where you said, "But I'm pretty sure that
neither of these sites will ever coincide with each other 100%."

How can they not coincide when the list is supposed to represent the
vote that is held here in the group? You seem to be saying that your
list will put programs into any category you feel is more
appropriate, regardless of what the vote results may be.

Because Susan is going to do things on her site that are not related to
the list, or what the group has voted on, or asked her to do, and I do
not plan on supporting these things on this site. It would not be
right for me to take these things from her. Hence, the two sites will
never coincide 100% with each other. I'm not saying what she's doing
is wrong, just that I do not plan on doing the same thing. But, both
sites will attempt to present the list in the best possible way that
they can. That's about the only point that both sites will coincide.
I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand this and or, are not
capable of seeing these things on your own.

I disagree on the idea that MultiRes should be in Desktop, as [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
describing.

Why do you keep snipping parts of your post I was quoting?

Damn! The idiot alert warning system just broke into action!

I do not like to waste bandwidth for people who are still using per
minute accounts. Not everything has to be quoted throughout an entire
thread. It's called being considerate of others. So I attempt to snip
out the fat and leave a little meat so that people reading at least
still know what the replies pertain to. If they get a little lost,
it's not a major task to move back up one article to get the previous
post. It's not an attempt to avoid things. I assume that's what you
were trying to imply. Maybe you should be a little more considerate of
others and start snipping also.

If you want to keep implying things like this, I can play along with
you on this.

Personally, I think you disregard snipping for a reason. I think you
do these things to clog up the thread in an attempt to try and make the
thread useless for others to read. I think you do all this when you
are not happy with what's going on. I'm also starting to think that
you do this because you like hearing yourself, or you like getting the
attention that you draw when you blatently post bs and ignorance.
Unfortunately, your starting to show your colors here and I think
others just might be seeing it also.

You have constantly avoided the jest of the subjects and always slipped
past it with irrelevant content about the author of the posts. I've
noticed this from you in other threads also. You constantly say that
the person is wrong, but never offer anything to really prove that they
are wrong, only that they are wrong and a few vague and misguided bits
of misinformation. You sure are a good side stepper Ben. But that's
not going to work with me. Maybe "it's worked in the past", but it
won't anymore. Because just like a bunch of people in this group said
in here not too long ago, times change and people need to change with
them.

To say such things is ridiculous. The Pricelessware list has worked

[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
the whole things needs to be reconsidered and simplified.

Are you sure you want to make that bet?

I don't make bets unless I know that I've already won before I even
make the bet.

I don't know Susan, but I know what it takes to run a site like that.
I'm sure that even she would like things to be a bit easier to handle.
To say the opposite is rediculous... Anyone not in favor of trying to
make things easier is just insane. If you want to make a suckers bet
with me, feel free.

I will tell you what is rediculous, and that is your opinion that [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
rather see things in disarray.

See, this is the part you don't understand.
Things weren't in disarray and it was working quite well.

This is the part you don't understand. Things have been in disarray
for far too long, and it's not working quite well at all. You feel it
is, I feel it isn't. But your way of disagreeing is more like trying
to force your opinion on me and everyone else. I'm basically stating
the obvious for which you refuse to see. I'm not going to force you to
see it either. I'm only here to bring this up. People can agree or
disagree, and if more people agree and than disagree, then something
will be done to fix the problems.

Right now, I'm responding to your personal issues with me since you
can't seem to stick to the subject at all.

And I also agree about the program descriptions and would like to

[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
and needs to be cleaned up, refined and organized better than it is
now.

Garrett, your sense of self regarding this seems to be egregiously
over-inflated. This has always been about the Pricelessware list and
how it is presented on the web. I hate to break this to you, but I
don't know you well enough to hate you or even dislike you.

Again, you bring this to a personal level and continue to do so. You
have yet to provide anything to discredit my claims that the list is in
bad shape. You disagree with me and only say that it's worked like
this all along, but that doesn't say anything at all. And it's really
starting to make you look bad.

I can say, though, that your actions thus far show that
pricelessware.org will be reflecting your opinions and not those of
this group.

My actions so far show that at least I am willing to stand up, take bs
from people like you for what I feel is right, which is more than you
can say for yourself. You speak from a podium, but say little of
value. In the end, my actions are intended to try and do the list
itself some good. But nay sayers would rather take things to personal
levels instead of providing any relevent information to show that the
list is in perfect shape, or disprove my claims that someting is wrong.

Just because it was voted the way it was, doesn't mean it was correct.
Did anyone stand up and say "Hey, that's not really where that should
go. Should we reconsider this and maybe put it over here instead?".
No, nobody did, but somebody is now. Is there something wrong with
someone standing up and saying something is wrong? Is this not
allowed? I'm sorry that you don't like that. Maybe you're not use to
someone being able to stand up in this group for what is right.

You don't want me to go on a crusade here Ben, trust me, I'm not afraid
to stand toe to toe with trolls, nay sayers and bullies. Been there,
done that, got hundreds of t-shirts from the victories. But really,
I'm not here for that. I'm here now in this thread because there are
some issues with the list, and I want to bring it up with the group and
hopefully they'll see the issues and maybe agree that we need to do
something about it. No need for any crusades or flame wars.

What are you doing to try and help with this? Give us some input that
doesn't include going after me personally. Ok, you disagree with me
about this, now give some reasons why, that don't include me
personally. Why do you feel the list is in perfect order? And please
don't give the lame excuse of "because it's been that way all along and
everyone voted it that way"... People make mistakes, mistakes need to
be fixed.

And when you say that, you sound like a freaking lemming that's about
to go over the cliff to your death. Sheesh, how thick can you get?

I think some sort of guidelines should be set regarding these

[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
list justice at all.

This is a patently false and misleading statement. The site was
working quite well until you and your ilk stepped in to change it.

This is not false and not misleading at all.. It's a fact. Open your
eyes and stop being blind to the facts. The list has inconsistancies,
programs misplaced in wrong catagories. Whatever guidelines there are
for this, if any are in effect at all, is failing and doing the list
injustice. I bet you haven't even gone through the list to find these
things that I'm speaking of, have you? I did. You're talking about
this and probably haven't even looked into this at all. I did the
research, maybe you should too before you continue to stick your foot
in your mouth. There are some that are so obvious that even someone as
thick as you can find. Good luck (if you even bother to get your hands
dirty).

I find it fascinating that you step into the successful public face

[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
to catch up to the times. Am I the only one that sees this?

What do you mean when you say "catch up to the times"?

Oh crap Ben... Are you really that dense? I don't have the tolerance
to teach you to see the world as it is now. Maybe you'll figure it out
eventually. I'm not going to hold your hand and walk you through this.
That's a job for your mommy. I'm already raising three of my own
children, don't need an overgrown co-dependent that's dense. You know,
If I were to ask my kids to go look over the list, I bet they'd even
find things wrong. But that wouldn't be a fair bet though.. My kids
grew up with me doing things like this and have a tendancy to see these
things quickly. They're not thick headed at all.

Look, if you're not up to par on this thread, then maybe you should
step down from it.

You've made your position quite clear... I heard you Ben. You disagree
with me. I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with me. I only
have a problem with you trying to drag me through the dirt, and what
happens when you try to drag someone through the dirt Ben?, they
freaking fight back. I disagree with you. And you seem to have a
problem with that. Enough with the bs already. Cough up some meat on
this subject and stop picking at the bones.

Ben, you dislike me, fine, but don't let that get in the way of your [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
to the list itself.

Like I said before, this has nothing to do with you and is about how
the list is presented. I would have nothing to say if you presented
the PW list as it was decided to be presented with the most recent
vote. You've now taken it upon yourself to change program categories
and program descriptions with no whit to any general consensus from
those of us involved with this group.

Well Ben, you might have something to say to Susan also, because she's
guilty of the same infraction as I. I don't blame her for doing what
she did either... She merely is trying to make the list as good as she
possibly can, and trying to the group some good by taking care of these
things. I would do the same thing, and I did. Now I'm trying to bring
this to discussion, maybe get some guidelines set, fix some errors and
get things on track so that the list doesn't continue to suffer. If
these things are addressed and resolved, it sure will make the whole
process a lot easier for the group, Susan and myself. But if you want
to continue to make things hard, that's fine. You have the right to do
that. But don't try to cover your ignorance up with BS.

Read over what I was talking about in the prior post and here [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
this.

This implies my original comments weren't "real or honest". I assure
they were and are. I would like to see a plain statement for what
your intentions are regarding the Pricelessware list.

Correct... Most of your original comments were intended as a personal
issue with myself, and not regarding the subject at hand fully. You
neglected to read what I was saying and rather you decided to make
comments about me personally. And you're continuing to do so. And you
probably still haven't researched this at all. How lazy of you Ben...
You talk the talk, but you sure as hell don't walk the walk.

Will it be an accurate presentation of the group's wishes, or will it
be a presentation filtered through your sensibilities?

Well, what do you think? Are you afraid to let something like this go
to a vote? Afraid that I just might be right and that maybe you might
be wrong? Hell, I'm not afraid of being wrong. If the group says that
the list is fine the way it is and that I should go stuff it, then
that's what I'll do. But so far, there has only been one or two who
seem to disagree. And both of these individuals continue to take this
to personal levels instead of providing proper input to the thread. And
neither of these individuals have looked into this at all, both merely
are trying to play this off the hip.

Anyway, the group, and not you soley, will decide what to do with this.

Now if enough level headed and honest people in this group say that [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
being Divine as possible.

I'm not looking for divinity, I'm looking for accuracy as to how it
reflects the wishes of this group.

No, you're not looking for anything at all. You can't seem to see
anything at all, so I'm not sure how you can look for anything.

If the group voted that you should cut your left testicle off, would
you do it because it reflects the wishes of the group? Or would you
ask the group to reconsider the vote and give them the reasons why?
Like maybe they may have made an oversight?

Hell buddy, don't know about you, but I sure as hell would bring it to
the group and say that I think they just might have made some mistakes
and to reconsider them and maybe get that fixed. If given the
opportunity, I'm sure they'd take a second look, and if they saw it
too, then they just might agree that something needs to be done.

Just because it was voted the way it is, doesn't mean that it's
correct. And if the group is made aware of these problems, don't you
think they have the right to know, and to decide whether the problems
should be fixed.

You say there's no problem, but I say there is, and now others are
starting to come forward and say that they just might feel that there
are some changes and or fixes needed.

As my kids would say, "Don't hate the player, hate the game". I'm [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
this, let's get down to business here.

OK, this was my last effort to persuade you from making a site that
reflects "you and yours" opinion of what Pricelessware should be.
Obviously, you are not receptive to any suggestions from those who
don't agree with you. Pricelessware.org is your site and yours
alone. I'm sure it will be quite successful for you.

You haven't made an effort in that regards at all. You haven't given
any good information to disprove my claims that there's a problem. All
you've done is take this to personal levels and dance around the whole
thing with BS.

You exepect me to reply to everything you say, but yet, you've ever so
gracefully avoided all the meat in this issue. Then complain that I'm
snipping stuff out. Wouldn't have to do that if you'd stop nagging
about me, filling up the thread with bs and thick headed ignorance, and
just stick to the facts. Come on Ben, give me and this group solid
facts as to how and why the list is not in need of some help? Stop
playing games... Stop beating up the grop with useless banter and
misleading contexts. Stop with the personal stuff with me and show me
and the group the meat of why you disagree.

I'm willing to go over this one more time..... The list is in disarray,
I think there needs to be something done about it. Maybe reconsider
the catagories, sub-catagories and how programs are placed in them, fix
the current list now before it becomes a major undertaking during the
next voting process. I also think that the descriptions need to be
discussed, maybe put some limits on how much text should be allowed for
a description. I'd like to discuss this with the group. If enough
people agree with me, then maybe we should do something about it. If
not, then it stays as is.

What do you think Ben? Can you give us a logical explaination about
what you think of this?

-Garrett

 

[Garrett]

Semolina Pilchard wrote:

[snip]

There's no perk of the job that allows the webmaster to override the
wishes of the group. No webmaster before Garrett has ever felt the

Uhh, yes, each one has done it and many times. SOS did, Genna did, and
Susan has also. You are obviously not paying attention when these
things happen, or you are refusing to see this.

need for one. There's a vast difference between Susan making a
practical choice about the organisation of the site in the absence of
requested input and Garrett substituting his opinion for that of the
group in the software definitions.

There's no difference at all. It's unfortunate that you didn't offer
to help her when she asked for help. But understand that there have
been things she's done without asking. And I can understand why she
doesn't ask. Just look at your posts regarding this and Ben's posts
regarding this. She doesn't want to get beat up with bs and ignorance.
When she did ask for help, where were you? Where was Ben? You all
complain about this and that, but you don't do jack when it comes time
to help fix things. Put up or shut up, you know what I mean. If you
want a piece of this action, then you have to be willing to do
something for it. I am.

For the sake of peace in the group I would be tempted to let it go.
After all, Pricelesswarehome.org will reflect the group's decisions
regardless of what Pricelessware.org becomes.

Again, you're wrong, pricelesswarehome.org does not fully reflect the
decisions and wishes of the group.

And if you were tempted to let it go, why didn't you just say that you
disagreed with what I said and left it at that? Why instead did you
attempt to make this a personal issue with me like Ben did?

It's as simple as this, "Garrett, I disagree with you on this, and I
think maybe you were wrong for making these few changes before
consulting the group. Next time Garrett, please get with the group
before making such changes, give us a chance to go over these things."

Wholly bat crap! How simple was that?, and it only took one small
paragraph, didn't contain any personal issues or rudness. Oh, and
don't forget to say the same to Susan for the changes she has done
without the consent of the group. I mean, if you're going to do this,
then you'd damn well better be fair about it, right? I mean, you want
to be fair don't you?

But instead, you decided to take this to new level... And then because
you didn't like how it went, now you say you don't want to annoy the
group anymore... Sorry, it's a little late for that, I'm sure the group
is annoyed now, and I'm sure they're annoyed with me greatly also, but
at least I'm trying to clear all this up. I'm trying to show that
there is a problem and get everyone to take a look and either agree
that there's a problem and to fix it, or to disagree and to let it go.

I didn't start this thread getting personal with anyone.. You came into
this and made it personal. In fact, I let go of the previous post you
made, because it mostly bs and a waste of time. But you're not getting
out of this that easy. You stuck your face into this, now back it up
with some valued input....

Here's my original post regarding this

"Personally, I have no problem with discussing possible changes like
this for the current list at pricelessware.org. In fact, when I
redesigned the site, I could not help myself from moving some programs
that were obviously in wrong categories and subcategories to more
obvious and logical locations. My opinion is that if there are
corrections needed, regardless if the vote process is long over, the
corrections should still be made when found. If MultiRes is in an
incorrect location or being classified wrong, then it should be
corrected now and not next year. Keep in mind, I only speak for the
site that I am currently maintaining and no other site.


[snip]

In summary, I propose clarifying the subcategory name, moving MultiRes
to Desktop (thereby making both Pricelessware sites consistent), and
improving the description. MultiRes illustrates the desirability of
additional indexing or some sort. Please limit this thread to these
topics.

BillR

I appreciate your intent and effort, and I also wish to avoid any
pointless bickering over such a minor thing. But I'm pretty sure that
neither of these sites will ever coincide with each other 100%.

I disagree on the idea that MultiRes should be in Desktop, as it's not
a an item that is soley intended as a desktop item. It's effects are
system wide and affect every program and aspect of the system and not
just the desktop. It's not a tool to pretty the desktop itself, nor
does it add any new functionality to the desktop or remove or edit any
functionality to the desktop. It's a system level tool and if you look
at other listing sites, you typically find such a tool in a system
category. I personally am trying to keep this particular site in a
form that allows most users to show up and logically pick a link and
and actually find what they expect to find in that category.

I do of course agree about the subcategory name and am more than
willing to adjust this to something more properly descriptive of the
type of program that it is.

In fact, I'd like to start seeing a more simple approach to the
category and subcategory naming conventions for the list. It seems
that these have become more of a puzzle than an useful classification
tool for the listings. Some of the subcategory names are more cryptic
than the programs they are suppose to be describing.

And I also agree about the program descriptions and would like to
expand on this subject also. I found that far too many descriptions
were too vague and lacking, while other descriptions are novel sized
and just far too much information which if the visitor needed, could
simply visit the site of the program for such a more indepth
description. The descriptions are just too inconsistent and should be
adjusted in my opinion.

I think some sort of guidelines should be set regarding these things
before the 2005, in fact it would be nice if we went over the whole
concept of Pricelessware and set in stone what the list is about, how
it should be handled, limits on what and where and how much etc.

-Garrett"

Wow! I really let everybody have it on a personal level now didn't I!
I was beating the crap out of you and Ben and everyone else.. Wholly
corn pops! I'm evil! Boy, I sure deserved the beating you and Ben
proceeded to give to me after that post eh?

Wait a minute here.... Hmmm, problems noted, points taken,
explainations given, issues elaborated on, willing to work things out,
willing to help sort things out... Ok, what did I do that was so wrong
now? What did I do that required you and Ben to get all bent out of
shape over this?

Thought I was rather pleasant and informative with that post. Wish
your post and Ben's post was in the same good form.

Maybe you and Ben are having second thoughts about your posts now?
Well, you can't take them back, and I've already got a seriously nasty
taste in my mouth from you two. Not sure I'd be willing to digres from
this influence I have of you two now. But, I am willing to try if you
two are willing to get real and stop taking this to new lows in this
group.

Now, I think there is a problem with the list. I think many items are
not in the proper catagories or sub-catagories. I think that some
descriptions are way tooooo long and that maybe we should set some
guidelines for that, and maybe for how catagories and sub-catagories
are setup and how programs get placed in these locations.

What do you think? Agreed or disagree?

See how simple this is?

The reason I feel I cannot do that, that I must continue to annoy the
group with my concerns is this: many, if not most of those who consult
and use Pricelessware arrive there not from a.c.f but from search
engines or by word-of-mouth advice. Pricelessware.org is the site
they will be led to and they will be poorly served if it is allowed to
become something other than a true reflection of the group's opinions
and wishes.

Well they will be poorly served if you have anything to do with it.
Your judements and misconceptions are severly bad. That's what's
annoying.. Not that you're posting, but that you're posting in bad form
without any good to add to the thread.

On the other hand, I'm willing to find and fix errors. I'm willing to
see when there's something wrong and try to fix it. At least if they
show up to this site, they'll be viewing information that's corrected.
Susan's site on the other hand, may not fair so well if she has to
listen to people like you and allow her site to suffer from thick
headed ignorance.

Probably why she doesn't always consult the group when she finds
something wrong and just fixes instead.

We have something good here; let's not allow it to wither on the vine.

HuH? I just told you and the rest of the group that there is a
problem, and you say that you don't want it to wither on the vine...
Hello!!! It's already withering on the vine and if you, I, and
everyone else don't do something about it, then it's already over and
everyone should just give up on the list now. It's poor attitudes like
yours that will kill the list.

Like Ben, I bet you haven't even bothered to research this issue at
all... Have you? Have you gone through each and every entry in the
list? Noticed any problems while doing that? Or do you just storm
into this thread not having a clue about this?

Before you leave this thread, I think you should at least give yourself
the chance to research this. Maybe you and Ben can get together and go
over the listings and see if you notice any problems.

If you don't then come back and simply say that you disagree with me on
this issue. Maybe we can avoid annoying the group if people would just
get to the point and stop trying to bash each other and avoiding the
issues.

But if you and others want the list to go shits, then go ahead, but
don't expect me to sit on my hands here and not do anything about it.
I'm going to do everything I can to insure that list is whipped back
into shape, and that it stays in shape. Might even be time to put the
list on a Jenny Craig diet.... It's getting fat!

Best regards,
-Garrett

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Uhh, yes, each one has done it and many times. SOS did, Genna did, and
Susan has also. You are obviously not paying attention when these
things happen, or you are refusing to see this.

Specific examples?

There's no difference at all.

Yes, there is. You can deny it as often as you like. Changing the
ware glossary without reference to the group is changing content the
group discussed and decided upon. Choosing which box to slot programs
into in the absence of requested input isn't.

It's unfortunate that you didn't offer
to help her when she asked for help. But understand that there have
been things she's done without asking. And I can understand why she
doesn't ask. Just look at your posts regarding this and Ben's posts
regarding this. She doesn't want to get beat up with bs and ignorance.

What nonsense you talk, Garrett! Get over yourself. Your main
contribution to the group is vague sniping at what has been done by
those before you and the greatest whine-fest it has ever been my
misfortune to see. Poor Garrett, those bad people in a.c.f treat him
sooooo bad. Grow up.

When she did ask for help, where were you? Where was Ben? You all
complain about this and that, but you don't do jack when it comes time
to help fix things. Put up or shut up, you know what I mean. If you
want a piece of this action, then you have to be willing to do
something for it. I am.

So do I. Not all of us can afford to be perched in front of our PCs
every day, waiting for the next post to come in. I'm away for for
weeks at a time, in no position to contribute.

Again, you're wrong, pricelesswarehome.org does not fully reflect the
decisions and wishes of the group.

Specifics, please.

And if you were tempted to let it go, why didn't you just say that you
disagreed with what I said and left it at that? Why instead did you
attempt to make this a personal issue with me like Ben did?

If I wanted to make it a personal issue with you, you'd be in no doubt
about it. I have no interest in doing so.

It's as simple as this, "Garrett, I disagree with you on this, and I
think maybe you were wrong for making these few changes before
consulting the group. Next time Garrett, please get with the group
before making such changes, give us a chance to go over these things."

OK. How about this: Change back the content you altered without
authority, Garrett.

Wholly bat crap! How simple was that?, and it only took one small
paragraph, didn't contain any personal issues or rudness. Oh, and
don't forget to say the same to Susan for the changes she has done
without the consent of the group. I mean, if you're going to do this,
then you'd damn well better be fair about it, right? I mean, you want
to be fair don't you?

Specifics, please.

But instead, you decided to take this to new level... And then because
you didn't like how it went, now you say you don't want to annoy the
group anymore...

Because I don't like how it went? What *are* you raving about? For
goodness sake stop the whining, Garrett. Have you no dignity? It's
perfectly possible to discuss these matters without you constantly
sickening the group with your pitiable sense of grievance.

Sorry, it's a little late for that, I'm sure the group
is annoyed now, and I'm sure they're annoyed with me greatly also, but
at least I'm trying to clear all this up. I'm trying to show that
there is a problem and get everyone to take a look and either agree
that there's a problem and to fix it, or to disagree and to let it go.

I didn't start this thread getting personal with anyone.. You came into
this and made it personal. In fact, I let go of the previous post you
made, because it mostly bs and a waste of time. But you're not getting
out of this that easy. You stuck your face into this, now back it up
with some valued input....

No, I think you let my other post go for another reason. You made an
accusation against Susan, I asked you substantiate it and you either
didn't want to or couldn't. And you're still making vague accusations
without backing them up.

Here's my original post regarding this

Yeah. I saw it before.

 

[Stan Weiss]

Please note: Since Ben continues to make this a personal issue with
me, I am now going to return the favor to him and treat him as treats
me and other members of this group.

If you're not in the mood to see Ben get a little roughed up in this
thread, then please disregard this post and move to the message.

Sorry for the interruption......

-Garrett

Ben Cooper wrote:

[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]

I did read the post, Garrett. Don't be condescending.

Ben, I'm not, But you're seriously lacking something here. I just
can't believe that you can't see the issues at all.

A program such as MultiRes can't be in the "wrong" location if it's
in the location that everyone voted it in.

If the list is to be usefully to users (the rest of the world) other
than this group then the programs need to be in the same category as on
most other freeware site even if that is different than where they were
voted to. Rememeber it is the end user for who the list must be easy to
use.

OMG! Are you a complete idiot?! Yes it can if people are not being
informed well enough about what type of program it is, what it does and
where it belongs. And it can be wrong if nobody stands up to inform
them about where it should be placed.

In summary, I propose clarifying the subcategory name, moving[snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
it. You must be seeing something into this that I do not see.

Maybe it was the part where you said, "But I'm pretty sure that
neither of these sites will ever coincide with each other 100%."

How can they not coincide when the list is supposed to represent the
vote that is held here in the group? You seem to be saying that your
list will put programs into any category you feel is more
appropriate, regardless of what the vote results may be.

Because Susan is going to do things on her site that are not related to
the list, or what the group has voted on, or asked her to do, and I do
not plan on supporting these things on this site. It would not be
right for me to take these things from her. Hence, the two sites will
never coincide 100% with each other. I'm not saying what she's doing
is wrong, just that I do not plan on doing the same thing. But, both
sites will attempt to present the list in the best possible way that
they can. That's about the only point that both sites will coincide.
I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand this and or, are not
capable of seeing these things on your own.

I disagree on the idea that MultiRes should be in Desktop, as [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
describing.

Why do you keep snipping parts of your post I was quoting?

Damn! The idiot alert warning system just broke into action!

I do not like to waste bandwidth for people who are still using per
minute accounts. Not everything has to be quoted throughout an entire
thread. It's called being considerate of others. So I attempt to snip
out the fat and leave a little meat so that people reading at least
still know what the replies pertain to. If they get a little lost,
it's not a major task to move back up one article to get the previous
post. It's not an attempt to avoid things. I assume that's what you
were trying to imply. Maybe you should be a little more considerate of
others and start snipping also.

If you want to keep implying things like this, I can play along with
you on this.

Personally, I think you disregard snipping for a reason. I think you
do these things to clog up the thread in an attempt to try and make the
thread useless for others to read. I think you do all this when you
are not happy with what's going on. I'm also starting to think that
you do this because you like hearing yourself, or you like getting the
attention that you draw when you blatently post bs and ignorance.
Unfortunately, your starting to show your colors here and I think
others just might be seeing it also.

You have constantly avoided the jest of the subjects and always slipped
past it with irrelevant content about the author of the posts. I've
noticed this from you in other threads also. You constantly say that
the person is wrong, but never offer anything to really prove that they
are wrong, only that they are wrong and a few vague and misguided bits
of misinformation. You sure are a good side stepper Ben. But that's
not going to work with me. Maybe "it's worked in the past", but it
won't anymore. Because just like a bunch of people in this group said
in here not too long ago, times change and people need to change with
them.

To say such things is ridiculous. The Pricelessware list has worked [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
the whole things needs to be reconsidered and simplified.

Are you sure you want to make that bet?

I don't make bets unless I know that I've already won before I even
make the bet.

I don't know Susan, but I know what it takes to run a site like that.
I'm sure that even she would like things to be a bit easier to handle.
To say the opposite is rediculous... Anyone not in favor of trying to
make things easier is just insane. If you want to make a suckers bet
with me, feel free.

I will tell you what is rediculous, and that is your opinion that [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
rather see things in disarray.

See, this is the part you don't understand.
Things weren't in disarray and it was working quite well.

This is the part you don't understand. Things have been in disarray
for far too long, and it's not working quite well at all. You feel it
is, I feel it isn't. But your way of disagreeing is more like trying
to force your opinion on me and everyone else. I'm basically stating
the obvious for which you refuse to see. I'm not going to force you to
see it either. I'm only here to bring this up. People can agree or
disagree, and if more people agree and than disagree, then something
will be done to fix the problems.

Right now, I'm responding to your personal issues with me since you
can't seem to stick to the subject at all.

And I also agree about the program descriptions and would like to [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
and needs to be cleaned up, refined and organized better than it is
now.

Garrett, your sense of self regarding this seems to be egregiously
over-inflated. This has always been about the Pricelessware list and
how it is presented on the web. I hate to break this to you, but I
don't know you well enough to hate you or even dislike you.

Again, you bring this to a personal level and continue to do so. You
have yet to provide anything to discredit my claims that the list is in
bad shape. You disagree with me and only say that it's worked like
this all along, but that doesn't say anything at all. And it's really
starting to make you look bad.

I can say, though, that your actions thus far show that
pricelessware.org will be reflecting your opinions and not those of
this group.

My actions so far show that at least I am willing to stand up, take bs
from people like you for what I feel is right, which is more than you
can say for yourself. You speak from a podium, but say little of
value. In the end, my actions are intended to try and do the list
itself some good. But nay sayers would rather take things to personal
levels instead of providing any relevent information to show that the
list is in perfect shape, or disprove my claims that someting is wrong.

Just because it was voted the way it was, doesn't mean it was correct.
Did anyone stand up and say "Hey, that's not really where that should
go. Should we reconsider this and maybe put it over here instead?".
No, nobody did, but somebody is now. Is there something wrong with
someone standing up and saying something is wrong? Is this not
allowed? I'm sorry that you don't like that. Maybe you're not use to
someone being able to stand up in this group for what is right.

You don't want me to go on a crusade here Ben, trust me, I'm not afraid
to stand toe to toe with trolls, nay sayers and bullies. Been there,
done that, got hundreds of t-shirts from the victories. But really,
I'm not here for that. I'm here now in this thread because there are
some issues with the list, and I want to bring it up with the group and
hopefully they'll see the issues and maybe agree that we need to do
something about it. No need for any crusades or flame wars.

What are you doing to try and help with this? Give us some input that
doesn't include going after me personally. Ok, you disagree with me
about this, now give some reasons why, that don't include me
personally. Why do you feel the list is in perfect order? And please
don't give the lame excuse of "because it's been that way all along and
everyone voted it that way"... People make mistakes, mistakes need to
be fixed.

And when you say that, you sound like a freaking lemming that's about
to go over the cliff to your death. Sheesh, how thick can you get?

I think some sort of guidelines should be set regarding these [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
list justice at all.

This is a patently false and misleading statement. The site was
working quite well until you and your ilk stepped in to change it.

This is not false and not misleading at all.. It's a fact. Open your
eyes and stop being blind to the facts. The list has inconsistancies,
programs misplaced in wrong catagories. Whatever guidelines there are
for this, if any are in effect at all, is failing and doing the list
injustice. I bet you haven't even gone through the list to find these
things that I'm speaking of, have you? I did. You're talking about
this and probably haven't even looked into this at all. I did the
research, maybe you should too before you continue to stick your foot
in your mouth. There are some that are so obvious that even someone as
thick as you can find. Good luck (if you even bother to get your hands
dirty).

I find it fascinating that you step into the successful public face [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
to catch up to the times. Am I the only one that sees this?

What do you mean when you say "catch up to the times"?

Oh crap Ben... Are you really that dense? I don't have the tolerance
to teach you to see the world as it is now. Maybe you'll figure it out
eventually. I'm not going to hold your hand and walk you through this.
That's a job for your mommy. I'm already raising three of my own
children, don't need an overgrown co-dependent that's dense. You know,
If I were to ask my kids to go look over the list, I bet they'd even
find things wrong. But that wouldn't be a fair bet though.. My kids
grew up with me doing things like this and have a tendancy to see these
things quickly. They're not thick headed at all.

Look, if you're not up to par on this thread, then maybe you should
step down from it.

You've made your position quite clear... I heard you Ben. You disagree
with me. I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with me. I only
have a problem with you trying to drag me through the dirt, and what
happens when you try to drag someone through the dirt Ben?, they
freaking fight back. I disagree with you. And you seem to have a
problem with that. Enough with the bs already. Cough up some meat on
this subject and stop picking at the bones.

Ben, you dislike me, fine, but don't let that get in the way of your [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
to the list itself.

Like I said before, this has nothing to do with you and is about how
the list is presented. I would have nothing to say if you presented
the PW list as it was decided to be presented with the most recent
vote. You've now taken it upon yourself to change program categories
and program descriptions with no whit to any general consensus from
those of us involved with this group.

Well Ben, you might have something to say to Susan also, because she's
guilty of the same infraction as I. I don't blame her for doing what
she did either... She merely is trying to make the list as good as she
possibly can, and trying to the group some good by taking care of these
things. I would do the same thing, and I did. Now I'm trying to bring
this to discussion, maybe get some guidelines set, fix some errors and
get things on track so that the list doesn't continue to suffer. If
these things are addressed and resolved, it sure will make the whole
process a lot easier for the group, Susan and myself. But if you want
to continue to make things hard, that's fine. You have the right to do
that. But don't try to cover your ignorance up with BS.

Read over what I was talking about in the prior post and here [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
this.

This implies my original comments weren't "real or honest". I assure
they were and are. I would like to see a plain statement for what
your intentions are regarding the Pricelessware list.

Correct... Most of your original comments were intended as a personal
issue with myself, and not regarding the subject at hand fully. You
neglected to read what I was saying and rather you decided to make
comments about me personally. And you're continuing to do so. And you
probably still haven't researched this at all. How lazy of you Ben...
You talk the talk, but you sure as hell don't walk the walk.

Will it be an accurate presentation of the group's wishes, or will it
be a presentation filtered through your sensibilities?

Well, what do you think? Are you afraid to let something like this go
to a vote? Afraid that I just might be right and that maybe you might
be wrong? Hell, I'm not afraid of being wrong. If the group says that
the list is fine the way it is and that I should go stuff it, then
that's what I'll do. But so far, there has only been one or two who
seem to disagree. And both of these individuals continue to take this
to personal levels instead of providing proper input to the thread. And
neither of these individuals have looked into this at all, both merely
are trying to play this off the hip.

Anyway, the group, and not you soley, will decide what to do with this.

Now if enough level headed and honest people in this group say that [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
being Divine as possible.

I'm not looking for divinity, I'm looking for accuracy as to how it
reflects the wishes of this group.

No, you're not looking for anything at all. You can't seem to see
anything at all, so I'm not sure how you can look for anything.

If the group voted that you should cut your left testicle off, would
you do it because it reflects the wishes of the group? Or would you
ask the group to reconsider the vote and give them the reasons why?
Like maybe they may have made an oversight?

Hell buddy, don't know about you, but I sure as hell would bring it to
the group and say that I think they just might have made some mistakes
and to reconsider them and maybe get that fixed. If given the
opportunity, I'm sure they'd take a second look, and if they saw it
too, then they just might agree that something needs to be done.

Just because it was voted the way it is, doesn't mean that it's
correct. And if the group is made aware of these problems, don't you
think they have the right to know, and to decide whether the problems
should be fixed.

You say there's no problem, but I say there is, and now others are
starting to come forward and say that they just might feel that there
are some changes and or fixes needed.

As my kids would say, "Don't hate the player, hate the game". I'm [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip] [snip]
this, let's get down to business here.

OK, this was my last effort to persuade you from making a site that
reflects "you and yours" opinion of what Pricelessware should be.
Obviously, you are not receptive to any suggestions from those who
don't agree with you. Pricelessware.org is your site and yours
alone. I'm sure it will be quite successful for you.

You haven't made an effort in that regards at all. You haven't given
any good information to disprove my claims that there's a problem. All
you've done is take this to personal levels and dance around the whole
thing with BS.

You exepect me to reply to everything you say, but yet, you've ever so
gracefully avoided all the meat in this issue. Then complain that I'm
snipping stuff out. Wouldn't have to do that if you'd stop nagging
about me, filling up the thread with bs and thick headed ignorance, and
just stick to the facts. Come on Ben, give me and this group solid
facts as to how and why the list is not in need of some help? Stop
playing games... Stop beating up the grop with useless banter and
misleading contexts. Stop with the personal stuff with me and show me
and the group the meat of why you disagree.

I'm willing to go over this one more time..... The list is in disarray,
I think there needs to be something done about it. Maybe reconsider
the catagories, sub-catagories and how programs are placed in them, fix
the current list now before it becomes a major undertaking during the
next voting process. I also think that the descriptions need to be
discussed, maybe put some limits on how much text should be allowed for
a description. I'd like to discuss this with the group. If enough
people agree with me, then maybe we should do something about it. If
not, then it stays as is.

What do you think Ben? Can you give us a logical explaination about
what you think of this?

-Garrett

 

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

pricelesswarehome.org does not fully reflect the
decisions and wishes of the group.

I think it tries hard to do exactly that. And AFAICT, so does
pricelessware.org.

It's as simple as this, "Garrett, I disagree with you on this, and
I think maybe you were wrong for making these few changes before
consulting the group. Next time Garrett, please get with the
group before making such changes, give us a chance to go over
these things."

I see once again that you are not open to suggestions.

 

[jo]

This is the part you don't understand. Things have been in disarray
for far too long, and it's not working quite well at all.

How long would you estimate things to have been in disarray for? And why
is it not working quite well at all?

Just because it was voted the way it was, doesn't mean it was correct.

Unfortunately that is just what democracy is all about.

Yet it continues to be the best way of enabling groups of people to do
things together.

 

[Garrett]

I think it tries hard to do exactly that. And AFAICT, so does
pricelessware.org.


I see once again that you are not open to suggestions.

Please tell me what suggestion was made? All I've seen is two specific
people ranting about what an evil person I am for making a few needed
changes. They didn't suggest anything at all.

I've been open to suggestion, I've taken suggestion, so please show me
where either of these two people made a suggestion.

Thanks,
-Garrett

 

[Garrett]

the >> wishes of the group. No webmaster before Garrett has ever
felt the

Specific examples?


Yes, there is. You can deny it as often as you like. Changing the
ware glossary without reference to the group is changing content the
group discussed and decided upon. Choosing which box to slot programs
into in the absence of requested input isn't.

And Susan changing formats on the site without constent from the group,
adding content without constent or even asking.

What nonsense you talk, Garrett! Get over yourself. Your main
contribution to the group is vague sniping at what has been done by
those before you and the greatest whine-fest it has ever been my
misfortune to see. Poor Garrett, those bad people in a.c.f treat him
sooooo bad. Grow up.

LOL, now you want to play the snipping game too. How childish of you.
There's nothing vague about that. It's common sense and respect for
others to snip.

You're the one who's whining, so get over it. So far, you have not
offered any input to the subject and still refuse to, because you don't
seem to care.

So do I. Not all of us can afford to be perched in front of our PCs
every day, waiting for the next post to come in. I'm away for for
weeks at a time, in no position to contribute.

That doesn't answer the question at all. That's called an excuse.
When Susan has asked for input or help, where were you? It doesn't
require someone to be here 24/7 either.

And if you're in no position to contribute, then why now do you chose
to do so now, which by the way, is not helping at all. When you're
needed, you're not helping, when you're not needed, you decide to help
by contributing personal issues instead of staying on track with what
the thread was about.

Specifics, please.

If I wanted to make it a personal issue with you, you'd be in no doubt
about it. I have no interest in doing so.

But you did make it personal. And you've avoided the subject at hand,
and now are trying to force me into providing you with proof of
things... I'll make you a deal, you cough up some input first on the
subject at hand, since you stuck your face into this regarding that and
not about the secondary issues which were brought up after you opened
your mouth. Put up or shut up. I'll put up as soon as you do. I'll
have my list ready for you as soon as you meet your end of this deal
first, since you have bypassed it to this point. You started this with
me, now finish it by doing the right thing and backing up your mouth.

OK. How about this: Change back the content you altered without
authority, Garrett.

Why thank you for asking. I will do that as quickly as possible.

Specifics, please.

Hello... You gotta pay the price first. You didn't do what I asked
first, so how in the hell do you expect me to do what you ask?

Because I don't like how it went? What are you raving about? For
goodness sake stop the whining, Garrett. Have you no dignity? It's
perfectly possible to discuss these matters without you constantly
sickening the group with your pitiable sense of grievance.

Whoa, wait a minute here.... You're the one who jumped into this
ranting like a crazy idiot. You lacked any regard for respect to
anyone else or me, and now you're going to try and lay this on me?

All you've done is whine and complain and you haven't yet backed up
your bs. But you have the nerve to ask me to back up my mouth when you
haven't even done so yourself? You're sick!

I present the issue that the list is in need of repair, and what was
your response? And you've continued to avoid the subject. You are a
sorry individual.

No, I think you let my other post go for another reason. You made an
accusation against Susan, I asked you substantiate it and you either
didn't want to or couldn't. And you're still making vague accusations
without backing them up.

Oh yeah, ok. I better reply then, wouldn't want you to think I was
avoiding your ignorant, useless and worthless bs. Personally, I
thought if I let it go, that you'd see what bad form your post was.
Trying to avoid the bs that you've layed upon this group.

I'm trying to help things, and you're just bs'ing your way through
this.. You have yet to provide anything to this thread that's of any
use at all. If you have nothing to offer, then stay the hell out of
things.

If I'm doing wrong to Susan, I'm sure she can stand on her own two feet
and tell me I'm doing wrong. She doesn't need a maniac like you
jumping to her defense. Besides, I'm not accusing her of anything
wrong. You are. You're saying that what I did is wrong, but of these
things I've done, She and those before have done the same, but you
don't seem to care. You cry wolf and want me to provide evidence for
you on something after the fact, and you haven't even backed up your
mouth from your original post, hell, you didn't even give any input
except to tell me off. How stupid!

I'll provide for you the examples you require, but what will you do
then? Will you shut up and stop your whining and complaining? Will
repent and do something of value for this subject? Will you finally
stop avoiding the original content of this thread and provide something
useful to this thread and group?

I don't think you have the integrity or ability to that.

Yeah. I saw it before.

And? And? Yes, you saw it, and here's your response, please read it
and tell me what you were giving to this thread?

The pricelessware list has been a mess for years and needs a major
overhaul and some serious refinement. Just ask Susan how hard it is to
try and maintain this list, and I bet she might even agree that the
whole things needs to be reconsidered and simplified.

Pricelessware, in form and content, is what the GROUP decides it will
be, year on year. It doesn't matter what you or Susan think; the
group decides on Pricelessware. It isn't Garrettware or Susanware.
Where Pricelessware is concerned, the webmaster is just there to carry
out the group's wishes. He/she does not have a bigger vote than
anyone else. You may not like it, Garrett, but that's how it is.
Your predecessors understood that simple democratic fact.

No one apart from you has suggested that Pricelessware is a mess.
That's not to say it can't be improved, and it will be, as happens
every year. When the group wants it changed you'll doubtless be told,
Garrett.
--
Semolina Pilchard


Quite the snotty and rude reply don't you think... My post just above
that was not snotty and rude like yours, was it now... Who the hell
are you to tell me anything like that. I'm part of this group, and I
will partake in the process also. You decided to take this thread in
another direction and now when called on it, you try to weasle out of
it. Wrong answer!

Are you really this ignorant? Do you expect to slap someone and then
think they're not going to slap you back?

And when I did call you on this really bad post of yours, what did you
do? Did you get defensive about it? Did it piss you off? Were you
angry?

Ahh, poor little Semolina got caught with her hand in the cookie jar,
boo freaking hoo.

That's what happens when you jump into an empty pool Semolina.

Ok, here's a small sample of the items you've requested:

1. The main entry page of the site has been
changed from it's original content.
2. The about the pricelessware site information
has been completely changed from it's original content.
3. The category index has been changed.
4. Previously missing information on entries have
now been filled in.
5. Some of the information formating has been
changed in the entries.
6. The information page has been changed.
7. Webware was added to the site.
8. Information on the homepage has been changed
from it's original content.
8. Overall, the site design has changed, new
pages added, new information added, colors
changed and things moved around.

None of these things were voted on, passed through the group for it's
consent, or requested by the group for her to do, she did these things
without consent of the group. These things do not represent the wishes
of the group!

Now stuff that in your big mouth!

Now I'm not complaining about her doing this, and i'm not going to say
that she's wrong for doing it, but when you sit there and tell me that
I'm wrong for doing it, then you'd better damn well be fair about this
and drag everyone into this and not single out just one person because
you don't like them.

Basically, you're the one complaining about Susan doing this, because
you brought this point up and have been ranting about it. Now tell
Susan what a bad girl she is for doing this.. Come on, I dare you to do
it. You did it to me, so be fair now, be rude and stupid with Susan,
let's see what that gets you.

The above is only a small sample, I'm sure if I really looked, I'd find
even find more, is that what you want? Do you want to continue to
avoid the big picture here and want to continue this little "Prove it"
game? Now it's your turn! Back up your mouth or shut up and get out
of the thread.

Ok, now, can we move on and get back to the subject? Would you like to
participate in this subject and stay on topic with it? If not, then
move on already. I'm tired of your rant and nagging, it's completely
unbecoming.


Best regards,
-Garrett

 

[Jack D. Russell, Sr.]

======================================================================
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <[email protected]>
* Newsgroup: alt.comp.freeware
* Reply to: All; "Garrett" <[email protected]>
* Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:33:56 -0500 GMT
* Subj: Re: [PL] MultiRes Suggestions [was Re: {PL] Small suggestions
for Pricelessware.Org]
======================================================================


[Sorry, BS skipped]

Uh...Hey, Garrett. I don't think there's any doubt in anyone's mind
where I stand on this whole fiasco (Not that it really matters), but
enough's enough. Take a step back and look at what you're doing. While I
think that your attempt at maintaining the Pricelessware website is
admirable and an improvement (so far), your recent postings in the group
are not doing a thing for your credibility nor the PWL How many people
do you see disagreeing with what you've done to date (and who are they)?
What purpose is served by your arguing with them? Why are you trying to
justify your actions to them? Do you value their opinions over the
majority of the participants here? You seem to be letting the few bad
apples spoil the whole barrel IMHO. You know that you're walking a very
thin line here, so why do it? You're never going to please everybody, so
please desist from trying to do so. Go ahead and do what you've been
doing (sans the bickering) and know that the majority here agree with
what you've done for pricelessware.org and ignore the rest. Please, for
the credibility of the group's sake,...STOP!

 

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

If the list is to be usefully to users (the rest of the world)
other than this group then the programs need to be in the same
category as on most other freeware site even if that is different
than where they were voted to. Rememeber it is the end user for
who the list must be easy to use.

I think the problem (and I don't know that it's much of a problem at
all) of programs perhaps not being where users may expect to find them
would be best solved by letting subcategories be tied to multiple
categories.

E.g., a user looking for a software firewall might reasonably click
'Internet' or 'Security' to try to drill down to the firewalls, and
ISTM it would be good if the firewall subcategory showed up with either
choice.

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Semolina Pilchard wrote:

And Susan changing formats on the site without constent from the group,
adding content without constent or even asking.
Like?

LOL, now you want to play the snipping game too. How childish of you.
There's nothing vague about that. It's common sense and respect for
others to snip.

I just get tired of the interminable length of your posts. I've never
known anyone to write so much and say so little.

You're the one who's whining, so get over it. So far, you have not
offered any input to the subject and still refuse to, because you don't
seem to care.

What input is it you want from me? You're as clear as mud. The only
message I wanted to get over to you was that I disapprove of your
changing the content of the site to suit your own wishes but
pretending it's still Pricelessware. I think I've done that, or would
have done if you were at all receptive to any form of comment. You're
not, of course; you're too interested in characterising any criticism
as a personal attack.

That doesn't answer the question at all. That's called an excuse.
When Susan has asked for input or help, where were you? It doesn't
require someone to be here 24/7 either.

Duh! Not at home, obviously! You're as dense as a rotting log,
Garrett.

And if you're in no position to contribute, then why now do you chose
to do so now, which by the way, is not helping at all.

Duh! I must be at home this week! Honestly, if there wasn't a
serious aspect to this I would find your drooling cretinism endlessly
amusing.

When you're
needed, you're not helping, when you're not needed, you decide to help
by contributing personal issues instead of staying on track with what
the thread was about.

But you did make it personal. And you've avoided the subject at hand,
and now are trying to force me into providing you with proof of
things... I'll make you a deal, you cough up some input first on the
subject at hand, since you stuck your face into this regarding that and
not about the secondary issues which were brought up after you opened
your mouth. Put up or shut up. I'll put up as soon as you do. I'll
have my list ready for you as soon as you meet your end of this deal
first, since you have bypassed it to this point. You started this with
me, now finish it by doing the right thing and backing up your mouth.

That sounds a little aggressive, panty-waist. But of course you're
quite safe in doing that, being thousands of miles away.

Why thank you for asking. I will do that as quickly as possible.


Hello... You gotta pay the price first. You didn't do what I asked
first, so how in the hell do you expect me to do what you ask?

<snip the rest of the drivel, hurl it in the bit-bucket>

Enough of this madness. Why the hell am I talking to you, you idiot?
Do as you want. There's nothing to be done with you.

 

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

Please tell me what suggestion was made? All I've seen is two
specific people ranting about what an evil person I am for making
a few needed changes. They didn't suggest anything at all.

I've been open to suggestion, I've taken suggestion, so please
show me where either of these two people made a suggestion.

The wink was meant to indicate that I was joking. Sorry about that.

 

[BillR]

I guess starting such a parallel thread at the same time would have

Hi BillR,

The categories and subcategories (and the programs that should be in
them) are subject to discussion and revision on the *PL2005* list. The
PL2004 categories are a done deal. They were discussed and decided as
part of the PL2004 selection process. At that time MultiRes was placed
in: DESKTOP: Monitor Tool.

Susan, I obviously disagree in part. I think it is appropriate to
correct errors or make minor improvements as we become aware of them
if the cost in effort does not exceed the benefit and there is general
agreement. This applies to incomplete or outdated descriptions just
as it does to poorly named categories.

I'm sorry I didn't mention this particular item the other times I
spotted it nor remembered to mention it when you solicited input.
Nevertheless, why should it not be corrected now? I have not
suggested massively reorganizing the categories you selected or the
programs selected -- just selecting a less confusing name. (In fact I
object to PL.Org doing so unannounced -- but that will be addressed
separately.) I am suggesting improving the selected name because it
is confusing for some of us.

I have ideas for reorganizing the categories but I did not want to
open that can of worms with this thread -- for all the good that
"want" did. Reorganization deserves its own thread and probably
several eventually.

You have periodically asked for reorganization suggestions but
generally rejected the little you have received. To anticipate those
who object to my characterization, I freely admit to reaching a
personal conclusion, and no, I will not resurrect old topics to
support it. As someone noted in this long thread, this is rather
uncharacteristic of your usual attitude.

Organizing the topics hierarchically and assigning multifaceted
programs to them is an inherently imprecise process requiring many
arbitrary (or nearly so), but not capricious, decisions. Since I have
not yet been able to develop a comprehensive structure that is clearly
superior, I haven't pursued it aggressively. Instead I have (mostly
unsuccessfully) pushed for adding text search to every page and
cross-references between categories and for programs.

I will update the MultiRes description

<Snip>

Thanks.

BillR

 

[Garrett]

======================================================================
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <[email protected]>
* Newsgroup: alt.comp.freeware
* Reply to: All; "Garrett" <[email protected]>
* Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:33:56 -0500 GMT
* Subj: Re: [PL] MultiRes Suggestions [was Re: {PL] Small suggestions
for Pricelessware.Org]
======================================================================


[Sorry, BS skipped]

Uh...Hey, Garrett. I don't think there's any doubt in anyone's mind
where I stand on this whole fiasco (Not that it really matters), but
enough's enough. Take a step back and look at what you're doing.
While I think that your attempt at maintaining the Pricelessware
website is admirable and an improvement (so far), your recent
postings in the group are not doing a thing for your credibility nor
the PWL How many people do you see disagreeing with what you've done
to date (and who are they)? What purpose is served by your arguing
with them? Why are you trying to justify your actions to them? Do you
value their opinions over the majority of the participants here? You
seem to be letting the few bad apples spoil the whole barrel IMHO.
You know that you're walking a very thin line here, so why do it?
You're never going to please everybody, so please desist from trying
to do so. Go ahead and do what you've been doing (sans the bickering)
and know that the majority here agree with what you've done for
pricelessware.org and ignore the rest. Please, for the credibility of
the group's sake,...STOP!

I'm sorry, but it's just so frustrating when they do this, and I'm so
tired of these people bashing anyone who's not on their side.

I'm trying to prove a point to these people, but as you note, they just
aren't going to listen and they just don't care about the facts.

But, for once, it's nice to see them step in their own crap and get
caught at it and suffer in it. Treat them as they've treated others
here. Worse yet, I keep trying to get them on track and give them a
chance to participate in something, and they're going nuts.. Love it
when they get slapped back and realize they don't like it. Now I think
they have a feeling of how the others around here have felt when they
slapped them all around.

Anway, I've proved my point, and you're right, it was getting over the
edge. I dropped some of the so called evidence they wanted, and I
doubt they'll back up their words after that, they'll just go on
ranting, and that's fine. Did what I needed to do with them and am now
getting back to those who are serious about this discussion. Even
Susan is open for discussion on things, and for that I'm greatful.

Thanks for wake up and pulling me out before I went off the deep end.


-Garrett

 

[Garrett]

How long would you estimate things to have been in disarray for? And
why is it not working quite well at all?

Ok, you seem to be serious about this and I appreciate that. I have
felt that the list lost it's original intent since 2000. The 1999 list
kind of started the ball rolling as it was intended to be a list of 100
items I do believe, but it went over that. The list was still rather
simple in 1999 also, but in 2000 the list grew in a giant leap.

The reason I feel that it is in disarray, is that the categories are
constantly changing and programs are getting tossed about and being
lost in the race. It's becoming harder for the average user to show up
to the list and instinctively click a link where they expect to find
certain types of programs that should be in a certain category, but
it's not there. It's in another category that the program isn't even
related to.

The list isn't just for us here in the group, it's a gift from us to
the world, but unfortunately, the world isn't as savy about this as we
have become due to our ties to this newsgroup and the list itself. We
all know where everything is at in the list, but the people we've made
the list for need to be guided through the site properly, and with
programs being misplaced, this becomes a task that the typical user is
most likely not willing to do.

If the list isn't properly setup in a logical and common order to what
the visitors are familiar with, then they are not going to like the
Pricelessware list and they may not recommend it to others and the list
that we've all worked on to present to the world becomes useless and
just another site on the web.

I have seen hundreds of web sites rise and fall, and they usually fall
because the content is unorganized and not logically placed in a manner
that the average user is accustomed to. An off the wall example would
like this... We all voted to place the steering wheel of a car in the
back seat and facing the wrong direction.. While we all know this and
voted on it, those intended to drive the care are instinctively jump in
the front seat and become baffled when they do not find the steering
wheel there. If they don't happen to look in the back seat and find
the steering wheel, they'll jump right back out of this car and go find
another one where the steering wheel is in the proper location.
Eventually, the car with the steering wheel in the back seat is left to
collect dust and people passing by will notice this dust and not even
bother getting into this car.

Ok, enough rambling, I think you get the jest of what I'm trying to
say... If not, just let me know. I'm not always the best at trying to
explain things. So I won't get mad if you ask me to clarify.

Thanks,
-Garrett

Unfortunately that is just what democracy is all about.

Yet it continues to be the best way of enabling groups of people to do
things together.

And it also allows the same groups to get back together and fix things
if something is wrong. That's all I'm trying to do here, is fix things
that are wrong. I may have jumped the gun a bit by fixing some of
these things in advance, but I'm here now trying to present this to
everyone to go over and see if we should attempt to fix these things or
not.

One thing I know for sure, even if we don't get this fixed now, we are
going to have to do something about this sooner or later. We can't
just keep letting this thing go like this, or it will become harder and
harder with each year to sort this stuff out. The list itself and the
sites that present it will become nothing more than a waste of time for
the visitors and a trivial item in the archives of the internet.

Susan has said that she's currently not interested in doing this right
now. I have no problem with that because I understand that she's
getting ready for the 2005 list. But that doesn't mean the rest of us
can't go over this. I'd really like to fix the 2004 list before we
even get to the 2005 list. Though we in the group are more than done
with the 2004 list, there are people on the internet who are going to
these sites and it's all new to them. Currently, pricelessware.org is
still kind of the central point for the list since it's the one that's
been used for all these years, so I think it would be ok and smart of
us to fix the listings there, and by 2005, both sites will be on track
with the list.

 

[BillR]

BillR wrote:

Personally, I have no problem with discussing possible changes like
this for the current list at pricelessware.org. In fact, when I
redesigned the site, I could not help myself from moving some programs
that were obviously in wrong categories and subcategories to more
obvious and logical locations. My opinion is that if there are
corrections needed, regardless if the vote process is long over, the
corrections should still be made when found. If MultiRes is in an
incorrect location or being classified wrong, then it should be
corrected now and not next year. Keep in mind, I only speak for the
site that I am currently maintaining and no other site.

I agree that minor tinkering should be undertaken as found/needed
provided that it is clearly identified and noncontroversial OR well
discussed and if necessary voted upon.

Categorization of programs is inherently difficult and somewhat
arbitrary -- but not capricious. I have my own opinions (note
plural!) on the proper placement of programs and best categories
somewhat at variance with Susan's. I hope you will propose a new
structure for discussion.

I heartily support having you suggest changes whether in the form of
"X should be Y" or by example even of the whole site. I think it is
inappropriate to reassign programs in Pricelessware.Org without
notice. It is well outside my understanding of what you stated you
would do with the site. To be much more blunt than in the OP, you
violated our trust when you unilaterally reassigned programs and
failed even to tell us until now.

Please accept my profuse apologies if I missed the thread. This
possibility was part of the reason I was treading so carefully in the
OP. Also please note that I do _not_ accuse you of nefarious or other
ill intent. I assume, as I hope others will, that it was an honest
mistake resulting from excess zeal or mistaken remit.

[snip]

In summary, I propose clarifying the subcategory name, moving MultiRes
to Desktop (thereby making both Pricelessware sites consistent), and
improving the description. MultiRes illustrates the desirability of
additional indexing or some sort. Please limit this thread to these
topics.

BillR

I appreciate your intent and effort, and I also wish to avoid any
pointless bickering over such a minor thing. But I'm pretty sure that
neither of these sites will ever coincide with each other 100%.

I see one of two possibilities. 1. Sites will coincide but differ in
format. 2. One of the sites will vary substantially from the basic
vote results. If the latter, I hope the site will recognize the ACF
contribution, but it will in nowise "be" the ACF site.

I disagree on the idea that MultiRes should be in Desktop, as it's not
a an item that is solely intended as a desktop item. It's effects are
system wide and affect every program and aspect of the system and not
just the desktop. It's not a tool to pretty the desktop itself, nor
does it add any new functionality to the desktop or remove or edit any
functionality to the desktop. It's a system level tool and if you look
at other listing sites, you typically find such a tool in a system
category. I personally am trying to keep this particular site in a
form that allows most users to show up and logically pick a link and
and actually find what they expect to find in that category.

I think almost equally good arguments can be made for placing MultiRes
in either category. For 2004, for better or worse, it was placed in
Desktop. Rather than moving it unilaterally, a cross-reference of
some sort would be a better solution. That would have the effect of
increasing the likelihood that someone will find what they are
seeking.

Changing the organization for 2005 would be a timely discussion for
another thread. If ACF comes up with a significantly better structure
I would probably even be in favor of applying it retroactively to
PL2004 programs. If nothing else, such a site would be an excellent
test of the new structure.

I do of course agree about the subcategory name and am more than
willing to adjust this to something more properly descriptive of the
type of program that it is.

I'm glad someone agrees. I sometimes feel a bit lonely when my
suggestions receive no support.

In fact, I'd like to start seeing a more simple approach to the
category and subcategory naming conventions for the list. It seems
that these have become more of a puzzle than an useful classification
tool for the listings. Some of the subcategory names are more cryptic
than the programs they are suppose to be describing.

And I also agree about the program descriptions and would like to
expand on this subject also. I found that far too many descriptions
were too vague and lacking, while other descriptions are novel sized
and just far too much information which if the visitor needed, could
simply visit the site of the program for such a more indepth
description. The descriptions are just too inconsistent and should be
adjusted in my opinion.

While I agree, using the author's description has lots of advantages
for future maintenance.

I think some sort of guidelines should be set regarding these things
before the 2005, in fact it would be nice if we went over the whole
concept of Pricelessware and set in stone what the list is about, how
it should be handled, limits on what and where and how much etc.

I don't think prescriptive guidelines of the sort you seem to be
suggesting are practical, much less realistic, for many areas. Either
way, most of this is beyond the scope of this thread.

For myself, I could see fruitful discussion of whether there is a
distinction between Pricelessware and best available recommendations;
of whether a Pricelessware site is only that or more generally an ACF
site; etc. But these topics are also out of scope.

I think guidelines for a once a year process of reorganizing
categories are possible. If we can get sufficient participation,
overall review of the categories, subcategories, and general program
assignment might take place in the summer. Whether MultiRes and
similar programs belong in Desktop or System utilities and what it
should be named is a good example. If necessary, subcategories might
change based upon the programs nominated and selected.

I do not think prescriptive guidelines are worth developing for this
area. First, guidelines such as "any category with more than 10
programs should be split" are quite arbitrary. Second, developing
good guidelines would be difficult. (I'll elaborate only if someone
fails to agree!). Third, this is an infrequent process that does not
begin to justify the effort required to develop good detailed
guidelines.

Garrett, despite my cavils in another thread, I like the new look of
the site. For 2004, I understood that your efforts would be primarily
oriented toward completing this effort and generally enhancing the
site with new capabilities. Unilaterally reassigning programs to
different categories is beyond your remit as site
administrator/webmaster. Please keep going on site improvements but
avoid unilateral changes to the content previously agreed upon by ACF.

BTW, congratulations on managing to avoid personal and OT comments in
most of your responses despite sometimes great provication. That
takes both a thicker skin and more restraint than I have.

I appreciate your efforts to create sites that represent ACF and
contribute to the content on the net.

BillR

P.S. Susan, I meant to include a similar last paragraph in my response
to you.

 

[BillR]

<Snip rant>

This is a quintessential example of the type of post that deserves to
be incinerated. Note I did not say flamed, just turned to ash and
allowed to blow away in the wind.

This certainly makes me think fondly of moderated newsgroups and
forums where a modicrum of politeness is enforced. I've noticed that
also tends to raise the general thoughtfulness of posts as well.

(Note, this is a comment on the quality of dszady's post, not an
attempt to reopen previous discussions.)

BillR