Vote results

[Susan Bugher]

Before you read the results on the very bottom.. I suggest we do a poll with
this question:

"Do you believe that we must protect free speech on the newsgroups above all
other values?"

This is the correct "vote" corliss should have asked.. not his misleading
nagware vote.

Huh? Vote on a given? Freedom of speech is *guaranteed* in ACF - it's an
unmoderated newsgroup.

Freedom of speech includes the freedom to indulge in tirades about
freedom of speech or anything else that strikes your fancy, the freedom
to engage in flame battles, "holy wars", the freedom to send floods of
Freeware posts etc. etc. etc.

We have the *freedom* to post anything we want. IMO some self-restraint
makes for a more pleasant newsgroup.

The Nagware poll asked who wanted to post/read about Nagware. Now that
the poll is over let's try to show *some* consideration for the wishes
of those on the other side - whatever side that may be.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[Roger Johansson]

I shouldn't worry about it Roger. In this discussion, nothing matters
very much, and very little matters at all.

Yes, it just surprises me, that somebody can count the votes so badly.

At the end of the day, no-one is going to take a blind bit of notice
of the results (for or against) and the group will carry on as before.
The poll (even though I participated) was a waste of time, at least
one person voted twice, most didn't vote at all (for the reasons
stated in the second sentence).
JC, I've had a great deal of respect for what you've tried to do for
this group in the past, but this was way over the top, badly
conceived, badly executed, badly concluded.

Yes.

I just want to ask that vote counter if maybe I am included in the
result as

"> number of sad nag losers = 1 ( I wont name him..... we all know who
he is)"

I first thought he talked about JC, but then I saw he had included him
in the list.

If he calls me a "sad nag loser", whatever that means, he is welcome to
the philosophy newsgroups to explain in detail what he has to say.

Reply in any of the threads there which I participate in and I will
reply.
But he should read some of my articles in the philosophy newsgroups
first, so he understands what he is up against.

 

[Vic Dura]

The Nagware poll asked who wanted to post/read about Nagware. Now that
the poll is over let's try to show *some* consideration for the wishes
of those on the other side - whatever side that may be.

Well said, as usual.

 

[Ron May]

At the end of the day, no-one is going to take a blind bit of notice
of the results (for or against) and the group will carry on as before.
The poll (even though I participated) was a waste of time, at least
one person voted twice, most didn't vote at all (for the reasons
stated in the second sentence).

I didn't vote, and it WAS for the reasons you stated. I would have
been a "yes" vote, but I do understand and agree with the basic point
John was trying to make with the poll. There are usually better
alternatives than nagware, and any recommendation ought to mention how
intrusive the "nag" is. If the nagware performs some specialized
function not readily available in "non-nag" equivalents, and you're
talking about a splash screen at startup that goes away with a mouse
click, I can live with that. I still see it as a less desirable form
of freeware (therefore on-topic) that should be recommended only with
a disclaimer.

Just my "after the fact" $0.02 worth.

 

[stop.net.nannies]

As for a discussion of "free speech", well now! There are legal
discussion groups where such a topic belongs, otherwise it is nothing
more than obsifucation of the issue (e.g., nagware). Coloring this
with terminology like "free speech" is absurd. There is no such thing
as "free speech" in the sense that the speaker romps around like a
bird flitting from here to there saying whatever he "feels" like whenever
however without consequences. Sometimes consequences are
immediate, other times they are remote, sometimes they are direct
other times they are indirect, nonetheless, there are always consequences
to your words and actions. Be careful of the seeds you sow...your
harvest will always come later than you sowed and in a far greater
abundance than the amount you sowed. If people don't like the
*rules* here, go elsewhere and turn your sommersaults and rant.

OMG .....another net nanny pontificating.
Too bad, you lost the poll. Live with it.

 

[hummingbird]

I didn't vote, and it WAS for the reasons you stated. I would have
been a "yes" vote, but I do understand and agree with the basic point
John was trying to make with the poll. There are usually better
alternatives than nagware, and any recommendation ought to mention how
intrusive the "nag" is. If the nagware performs some specialized
function not readily available in "non-nag" equivalents, and you're
talking about a splash screen at startup that goes away with a mouse
click, I can live with that. I still see it as a less desirable form
of freeware (therefore on-topic) that should be recommended only with
a disclaimer.

Just my "after the fact" $0.02 worth.

And very valid comments too. That is one good reason why I voted Yes
(not that I would have take any notice if JC had won his private war).

JC needs to understand there are perfectly helpful reasons for
mentioning non-100%-free s/w on occasions.

 

[John Jay Smith]

I am not colorizing, you are hiding behind you finger.

It comes down to this:
I want to be able to add addition information about alternative solutions,
as the term freeware is described in wikipedia, after first giving a
"freeware" solution (only when needed

I want to help the poster by sharing my knowledge.

I want to be able to supply information within logical parameters in order
to help.

In this context, do you think that someone has a right to stop me from
speaking?

 

[John Jay Smith]

perhaps I did miss something... you can count them yourself and post your
results

 

[John Jay Smith]

Lol that was some humour!... lol no its not you....

its the guy who started the "vote"

 

[John Jay Smith]

Susan. You don't know the underlying story behind the vote.
This is corliss's private little war.

This whole "vote" was because Corliss wanted to restrain me from posting
information I though helpful for the poster asking a question

He thought by starting a vote he could then come back to me and say
no one wants your information, so scram. This is why it is all about
free speech. He was trying to find a way to manipulate this newsgroup
with his "vote" by calling it a nagware vote, then find a way to censor me,
either by calling me a troll or telling me that I was not posting in context
of this
group, probably creating flamewars if I didnt listen.. and he would have
that
vote to back him up.

This is the context of what I call freedom of speech. Not talking about
anything imaginable,
not starting flamewars, not trolling... but offering information to help in
a way that is
in harmony with the general guidelines of this newsgroup.

I offered some help before that did not have anything to do with freeware,
it was advice.
I also gave a gmail account to someone who wanted it. With Corliss's logic
these efforts
should be banned. This is what I call free speech, free as long as it is
positive and related.

Do you have a problem with this? If not you should agree and support my
efforts.

thanks

 

[John Jay Smith]

wrong, read my reply to susan

 

[John Jay Smith]

I did not count the votes badly...

I triple checked them before I posted.. However I am using a free
newsserver,
and perhaps IT missed something, not me.
This is WHY I posted the names next to the votes, so a person can tell us
if he was not included.. Can you understand now?

Anyone can count them and post the result,
why dont you do it since you can count better than me?

 

[John Jay Smith]

Is "nagware" off topic in freeware ng? YES other than to state that

such a program is nagware.

Nagware is NOT offtopic in this newsgroup!

This newsgroup is called alt.comp.freeware

Please read the meaning of the term freeware in wikipedia a free online
encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

I quote wikipedia: "The only criterion for being classified as "freeware" is
that the software must be made available at no cost"

and even in that case the newsgroup has an ALT before its name...

this means ALTernative giving the meaning of freedom not some
netcop dominated group as Corliss envisions it.

However I dont personally post nagware unless it is the last resort, and no
other
freeware exists, and I notify the poster WARNING him of the nature of the
application.
Just like the FIRST POST that started this whole corliss vote thing!

 

[Craig]

We have the *freedom* to post anything we want. IMO some self-restraint
makes for a more pleasant newsgroup.

The Nagware poll asked who wanted to post/read about Nagware. Now that
the poll is over let's try to show *some* consideration for the wishes
of those on the other side - whatever side that may be.

Susan

Amen & Hallelujah.

-Craig

 

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

Susan. You don't know the underlying story behind the vote.

You owe me one (1) keyboard.

 

[badgolferman]

Susan. You don't know the underlying story behind the vote.
This is corliss's private little war.

This whole "vote" was because Corliss wanted to restrain me from
posting information I though helpful for the poster asking a question

He thought by starting a vote he could then come back to me and say
no one wants your information, so scram. This is why it is all about
free speech. He was trying to find a way to manipulate this newsgroup
with his "vote" by calling it a nagware vote, then find a way to
censor me, either by calling me a troll or telling me that I was not
posting in context of this group, probably creating flamewars if I
didnt listen.. and he would have that vote to back him up.

This is the context of what I call freedom of speech. Not talking
about anything imaginable, not starting flamewars, not trolling...
but offering information to help in a way that is in harmony with the
general guidelines of this newsgroup.

I offered some help before that did not have anything to do with
freeware, it was advice. I also gave a gmail account to someone who
wanted it. With Corliss's logic these efforts should be banned. This
is what I call free speech, free as long as it is positive and
related.

Do you have a problem with this? If not you should agree and support
my efforts.

thanks

You are new to this group and don't understand the
personalities/dynamics. You have gotten your way this time so I
suggest you learn to back off. Stop pushing or you will get more
people lined up against you.

 

[John Jay Smith]

No to posting any imaginable unreleated thing or flamewars or trolling.

Yes to posting helpful information when needed and in context with the
subject in this newsgroup.

No to people who want to stop other people giving advice that is intended to
help the poster that is searching for some solution.

Yes to other forms of freeware, ONLY when needed, and given warning
of their nature.

This is the correct meaning of freedom I give.. not something wild and out
of control as susan said, although those too cannot be enforced.... since
this is the usenet after all.

 

[John Jay Smith]

You are new to this group and don't understand the

personalities/dynamics. You have gotten your way this time so I
suggest you learn to back off. Stop pushing or you will get more
people lined up against you.

Your assumptions are wrong.

I am NOT new to this group.. I have been here for years and years and
years..probably longer than you!
I am not a fool, I understand things better than you can imagine.

You want me to stop talking and shut up, being afraid of some netbullies?

As I said before some time, this group is one of the best on the internet,
since it is full of people wanting to help others giving advice and
information.
Some of them have a vast knowledge of what programs are out there....
And I never seen or known this corliss guy before nor did I wish to get into
this.
But hey, when the time comes you have to defend your ideals and not shut up
because some bully tells you to. What would you have done? Pulled your
tail between your legs and run?

In any given group (online or in the real world) there is always a
percentage of ill willed people.
This is a fact I have studied in detail... this is not new news to me.
If I see too many people like that here I will just leave!
However I think that this is not the case.. most people are nice in here.
It also would be a loss to the people who actually come here looking for
help. if I left.

I have not "gotten my way".... I find this whole thing disturbing, a loss of
time,
tremendously negative and non constructive.
I am not "pushing", just explaining the situation to seemingly intelligent
people.

Are you one of them?

THIS is the reason why perhaps I should refrain from expressing my opinions
here.
Not because I am afraid to speak, but because I must use my energies more
efficiently.
I cannot change the world, not by this way at least.. I have another
plan.....

I have to keep my energy levels well so I can offer more to the people that
need it.

 

[Mark Warner]

This is the context of what I call freedom of speech.

Between Corliss thinking a post about "nagware" will bring the free
software movement to its knees and you thinking that a post about
"nagware" is some kind of inalienable right, methinks that there are a
couple people here that need to get a grip.

 

[Susan Bugher]

"John Jay Smith" <-> wrote in <news:[email protected]>:

You owe me one (1) keyboard.

Dad-dratted humorists. (He owes me one too.)

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)