Call for a vote:

[Caesar Romano]

YES

It looks like the YES votes carry the question.

However, this is just a straw poll and not binding.

 

[Junefly]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware,
demoware, nagware, PROmotionware, shareware, spyware, time-limited
software, trialware, viruses or warez for me, please.

No!

 

[Rundkopf]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

yes

 

[Susan Bugher]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

yes

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php

"Nagware: has a popup (nag) screen, asking you to purchase the software.
You must press a button to get past the nag screen."

We've been discussing Nagware apps for years AND selecting them for the
Pricelessware List - often with *inaccurate* ware descriptions. . .

Trillian was (finally) *identified* as Nagware during the PL2004
selection process. Trillian's nag started after 1000-2002 hours of use.
Note: Trillian was selected for PL2004 after winning a ware ballot.
(Trillian was also selected for PL2002, PL2003.)

There were "It's not *really* Nagware" posts during the recent
Pricelessware ware ballots for PowerDesk (PL2006x, PL2005, PL2004,
PL2003, PL2002, PL2001) and AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic (PL2006x,
PL2005, PL2004, PL2003).

"It's not *really* Nagware" is fuzzy thinking. If it meets the ACF
definition of Nagware it IS Nagware and it should be labeled as such.
OTOH a Nagware label does not tell the whole story - all nags are NOT
alike.

ISTM good ware descriptions are one of ACF's greatest accomplishments
Censorship encourages fuzzy thinking and bad ware descriptions. IMO
attempting to censor discussion of Nagware is step in the wrong direction.

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)

 

[MLC]

sabato 29 aprile 2006 John Corliss ha scritto:

Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

yes

 

[John Jay Smith]

Suzan, are you the webmaster of that site? priclesswarehome.org?

thanx

 

[Susan Bugher]

Suzan, are you the webmaster of that site? priclesswarehome.org?

Yes.

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)

 

[Andy Mabbett]

I suspect that he is a nice guy

Perhaps he's never told you to drink drain cleaner, stalked you to other
newsgroups, or made implicit threats of violence against you. Yet...

 

[KBB]

No

KBB

 

[=?iso-8859-1?Q?Omar=A9?=]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware,
demoware, nagware, PROmotionware, shareware, spyware, time-limited
software, trialware, viruses or warez for me, please.

Yes

 

[Gert van der Kooij]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

No

 

[JayJay]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

Yes.

 

[Lawrence]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

No

Lawrence

 

[Yussuf]

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

No.

Yussuf

 

[Jim]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

Yes.

 

[Rockmaniac]

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

No.

I don't think this vote is valid though, as you did not indicate when
the poll is closed.

Rockmaniac

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

Yes.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[dansheen]

Please just answer yes or no. If you feel that discussion is called for,
please start another thread.

Question (rephrased): Except in the context of describing features that
one is looking for in a freeware program, should discussion of nagware
be considered on-topic in this group?

yes

 

[Bjorn Abelli]

Yes

But I also think that those discussing nagware should be frank about the
severity of its nagging. The similar thing goes for crippleware, etc.

I'm not sure that this thread can be considered a "vote", but I consider it
to be an interesting "opinion poll".

// Bjorn A



Inviato da X-Privat.Org - Registrazione gratuita http://www.x-privat.org/join.php

 

[Gill Bates]

My vote:

NO

Gill Bates