?
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=
I'll go with "personal best."
I'll go with "personal best."
?
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=
O
Onno
Now that is really sick, Blinky
As Q said: personal best.
D
dkg_ctc
No, that's not all. You can't simply brush off other people's
opinions by saying "that's all". Nice try, though. See below.
*snip*
No, there is no "However". The group has voted Dialog as
pricelessware. Pricelessware is defined as "The best of the best in
Windows ***FREEWARE***, as determined by the readers of
alt.comp.freeware". Notice "as determined by the readers of
alt.comp.freeware"? That means that the group has decided, and one,
or two, or even one hundred people arguing that it's not freeware and
off-topic, doesn't change the fact that the group has decided it IS
freeware. (And good freeware at that.)
*snip*
And all I'm saying is that the group says it is. Your opinion isn't
more important than that of the group's. Maybe when the Pricelessware
nominations and votes roll around, there will be enough readers who
agree with your to decide that Dialog isn't "the best of the best in
Windows FREEWARE"; until then, it doesn't matter what you state.
You're outnumbered. Minority rights, majority rules, and all that
good stuff.
J
John Fitzsimons
If it weren't time limited then would you call it freeware ?
O
Onno
[snip]
In my previous post I explained what that means and how that could have
happened, but you snipped it for your convenience.
You are wrong. Several people have already said that they do not consider
Dialog freeware. Just like others have said it was. Usual practice in a
discussion group.
I never said it was
.I always find it funny when people deny something that hasn't even been
stated.
By the way, you don't determine what the group's opinion is.
[snip]
[snip]
If you really meant that you wouldn't reply to my post.
D
dkg_ctc
No, I snipped it because it's irrelevant. The group voted Dialog
pricelessware. Period.
So, so by way of a pricelessware vote, the group didn't say Dialog
was freeware? There you go pretending that your opinion is more
important than that of the group.
Of course, the "several people" (which is really very few) don't
override the fact that Dialog was voted pricelessware by the group.
I never said it was
That certainly seems to be the implication when you basically assert
that it's not freeware, despite the group voting it as the best of
Windows freeware.
No, the group does, and has, via the Pricelessware votes.
Boy, and you have the gall to talk about what *I* "conveniently
snipped"? Let's look at that statement in whole again, before you
decided to snip--in mid-sentence, by the way.
Basically, the group has decided, and voiced their opinion by voting
it Pricelessware. The fact that YOU claim it's not freeware doesn't
matter when the group has decided that it is. Period. You can argue
until your blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that "the
readers of alt.comp.freeware" have determined that Dialog not only
freeware, but "the best of the best in Windows freeware". All you're
trying to do is say that the readers' decisions don't count because
they don't know any better and can't thnk for themselves. I find that
attitude quite insulting.
O
Onno
[snip]
Well, it isn't, as I explained that Dialog may very well have been
accepted to the votes based on a wrong assumption. Once again, by then
fewer people were aware of the time limitation and its consequences.
People voted for Dialog because of its qualities.
The group said it was great software. And they thought it was freeware.
By then, I too thought it was freeware.
You are really the only one mentioning the idea that my opinion would be
more important that that of the group. I sincerely hope that you are the
only one thinking of it.
And the people insisting that it is are more numerous? Not even you are
doing that. You're just saying that the group said it is. Which is a
different thing.
By 7 people. That is all.
So if a majority says something, it must be true? If a majority says that
you are the one who killed Kennedy you will accept your death sentence?
[snip]
[snip]
What I snipped had nothing to do with my reply.
What you snipped would have shown that your reply was pointless.
[snip]
Not at all, I'm just trying to apply a definition.
Complete and utter nonsense. As I said before, when the votes were cast I
didn't know any better either. But I can still think for myself.
I have an opinion of my own about the ware status of Dialog, which is
more than what you can say. You're just repeating a voting.
J
John Fitzsimons
< snip >
What we have here is another "addition" to Vic and Roger. "If the
group doesn't vote *my* way then it is an invalid and/or outdated
vote."
Corollaries are :
"I think this way so that means that the majority do."
"From the above it is obvious that dissenting views are outnumbered."
?
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=
Attacking straw men is apparently not entertainment enough - the straw
men must also be put on pedestals.
D
dkg_ctc
So that invalidates their opinion, huh? Well, how kind of you to
invalidate everyone else's opinion...
Then when the next vote comes around, you can convince everyone that
it's not freeware. Until then, you don't have a leg to stand on.
Group: "Dialog is the best of the best in Windows freeware."
You: "It's apparently not freeware. The Pricelessware vote doesn't
count."
How exactly is that anything OTHER than you saying that your opinion
isn't more important than that of the group?
Very observant of you.
What's your point? The group said it is. I don't see how much room
for discussion.
And?
Oh, I'm sorry...that's it? Because I sort of assumed that the
pricelessware votes were votes of aye versus nay; now, correct me
if that assumption is wrong, but if it's NOT wrong then the fact
that it was voted pricelessware by seven people means that there
weren't seven people who claimed it wasn't freeware.
Oh, that's rich...when it's a majority of group members deciding the
definition of freeware, then it's the end-all, be-all of votes.
When it's a majority of group members decide a piece of software is
freeware, the majority suddenly can't be trusted? Like I said
below, I find the attitude that the group doesn't know any better to
be offensive.
Talk about a specious argument. But I'll tell you what, if you can
find a jury of 12 impartial people who, going on the evidence, find
me guilty in a court of law of killing Kennedy, then I'll accept the
death sentence.
Except that what you snipped changed the whole meaning of what you
did quote.
What I snipped had no relevance. You can't go back to a discussion
a year ago and suddenly make it irrelevant because you claim that
some people didn't know some information. Last I checked, you can't
simply claim, "Mr. XXX isn't really the president, because not all
of the voters had all relevant information." Yet, that's exactly
what you're trying to do here.
A definition agreed upon by the majority...are you saying the
majority can't be wrong?
No, it's not. You're saying that the group didn't know better
before, but that you know better than the group now, and therefore
your definition should carry more weight.
Silly me, repeating defending the will of the group. Whatever was I
thinking?!
But you want to know my opinion of the ware status of Dialog? I think
it's freeware. I myself wouldn't vote it pricelessware, but guess
what?
MY OPINION DOESN'T MATTER!! THE VOTE HAS ALREADY TAKEN PLACE!! IF
YOU DON'T LIKE THE RESULTS, TOUGH SHIT!!
Get it? You can bitch and moan all you want about how it's not
freeware; the group has decided otherwise. When the Pricelessware
votes roll around, you can jump up and down, yell and scream about how
it's not freeware, and make sure that everyone has all the relevant
information; until then, for all the crap you spew, it means nothing
because the group has decided.
D
dkg_ctc
*snip*
Oh, and for the record, if you wish to tell everyone that the group's
decision doesn't count because you say it doesn't, you can blow me.
I'm not participating in this thread any more. It's obvious that the
only argument you have is "Well, the majority is right, except for
when it's wrong," and I have better ways to spend my time than
listening to such a two-faced argument.
Oh, and for the record, if you wish to tell everyone that the group's
decision doesn't count because you say it doesn't, you can blow me.
I'm not participating in this thread any more. It's obvious that the
only argument you have is "Well, the majority is right, except for
when it's wrong," and I have better ways to spend my time than
listening to such a two-faced argument.
A
Aaron
Funny, to judge from most posters who love to debate meta-topics
like these, I think it's more widespread than you think (ie almost
everybody does). It's the nature of the game really. To debate such
topics you have to make big claims that cannot be easily supported since
evidence is always lacking in such debates.
Even you , John.
Aaron (my email is not munged!)
O
Onno
[Johns post snipped]
John, if you snip out everything I wrote and don't even reply directly to
my post, please snip out my name too.
Thank you.
John, if you snip out everything I wrote and don't even reply directly to
my post, please snip out my name too.
Thank you.
O
Onno
[snip]
Why do you ask a question when you think you already know the answer?
That's rather pointless, just like your assumption, by the way.
Do you realise how funny it is what you wrote here? You are saying that
my arguments don't count now, but when the votes are held, they suddenly
will.
Whether votes are held or not makes no difference to the correct
application of a definition.
Liar! I did not write the second sentence. You did.
[snip]How exactly is that anything OTHER than you saying that your opinion
isn't more important than that of the group?
And?
That was your majority. Seven people
). Just voting for a program theyliked, not arguing that it was freeware.
You must agree that arguing is a lot more work than just passing a vote.
Want more figures?
The total number of votes was 53. So what you call a majority was
actually a meager 13%. Xnews and (Super) Gravity received more votes than
Dialog.
[snip]
That is not an answer to my question.
What attitude? Whose attitude?
I find your remark that what I state doesn't matter offensive. And you
didn't even mean that.
Then either you were the man on the grassy knoll or you're an idiot.
What I snipped was just a lot of stuff that you had written before, and
have after. I left your end conclusion, which was the only original part.
[snip]
Then why do you do it? You are the one raking up the voting of last year.
Not at all. What I am saying is something like 'mr. XXX should not have
been a presidential candidate because he is no citizen of our country/
was not born in our country' .
Get it? Hardly rocket science.
No, that's what you are saying.
You're really mixing things up here. The group did not vote about a
definition last year, neither did I ever propose one.
Good question.
[snip]
Thank you, but you are doing enough bitching and moaning for the two of
us together.
[snip]
Thank you, but you seem much more eager to jump.
The only one screaming here is you. See above.
Oh dear, swearwords. Do you really think that will entice me to descend
to the same level of arguing? Forget it.
O
Onno
I don't think that's a great loss. the only thing you've been doing is
hiding behind a pricelessware voting and throwing insults at me.
Stop putting words in my mouth. If you can't find a point, don't invent
them either.
O
Onno
Attacking straw men is apparently not entertainment enough - the straw
men must also be put on pedestals.
People want something to brag at home about.
)'No, this was not an ordinary straw man, he was on a pedestal!'
( 'Wow, you're so brave.'