Pricelessware Cumulative List

[Susan Bugher]

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

I thought this might be useful to some . . .

It's an alphabetical list of PW programs from 2001-2003 (includes 2003
PW nominations).

Suggestions? Comments?

Susan

 

[=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mal=F9?=]

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

I thought this might be useful to some . . .

Great job!

It's an alphabetical list of PW programs from 2001-2003 (includes 2003
PW nominations).

Suggestions? Comments?

Suggestion: it would be handy to make the items still present on PW as
links to their description, as it is in the Alphabetical List.

 

[Jaime Littlebeaver]

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

Thanks, Susan. Great Job

 

[Maureen Goldman]

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

I thought this might be useful to some . . .

It's an alphabetical list of PW programs from 2001-2003 (includes 2003
PW nominations).

Suggestions? Comments?

Excellent!

 

[John Fitzsimons]

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

I thought this might be useful to some . . .

It's an alphabetical list of PW programs from 2001-2003 (includes 2003
PW nominations).

Suggestions? Comments?

Susan

IMO the above page should be referenced to,

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/PL2003AlphabeticalList.htm

and the 2002 version. Wherever that is.

As well as being referenced from both those pages.

Lastly, IMO the above page should include the date eg. "Pricelessware"
(2002-2003). Probably the same should apply to the 2001-2002 version.


Regards, John.

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

 

[Susan Bugher]

Thanks, Susan. Great Job

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

Excellent!

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

I suggested a link on

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

directly to

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/PL2003AlphabeticalList.htm

and

http://www.pricelessware.org/2002/pricelesswarealphabetized.htm

Hello John,

I have revised the cumulative list:

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/CumulativeList.htm

added links to the PL2002 archive and to the PL2003 nominations page.
(Links to the 2003 pages were already on the web page.

Susan

 

[Matt]

Hi Malù,

I agree but that's a bit more work.

This is the *quick and dirty* version. I don't guarantee 100 percent
accuracy (have already spotted one error). Revisions to follow . . .

If the EXPELLED are also noted there, their expulsion from the list
and reason for it should also be noted - it should be recorded
somewhere, even in a separate "hall of shame" perhaps?

 

[Susan Bugher]

If the EXPELLED are also noted there, their expulsion from the list
and reason for it should also be noted - it should be recorded
somewhere, even in a separate "hall of shame" perhaps?

Why??????

most common reason is change to $ware . . .

Susan

 

[Genna Reeney]

If the EXPELLED are also noted there, their expulsion from the list
and reason for it should also be noted - it should be recorded
somewhere, even in a separate "hall of shame" perhaps?

While it may be of anecdotal interest to see which programs have been chosen
year after year and which have been dropped, the primary purpose of the list
is to provide people who frequent this newsgroup with a quick reference list
of what the members of this group currently think to be the best programs in
each category.

Furthermore, programs can be dropped simply for not being re-nominated
during the next cycle. Nothing shameful about it.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Matt wrote:

While it may be of anecdotal interest to see which programs have been
chosen year after year and which have been dropped, the primary
purpose of the list is to provide people who frequent this newsgroup
with a quick reference list of what the members of this group
currently think to be the best programs in each category.

Furthermore, programs can be dropped simply for not being re-nominated
during the next cycle. Nothing shameful about it.

Agree, Genna. I don't think a list of favorites need contain an arhive
of old business.

 

[Mcubed]

Agree, Genna. I don't think a list of favorites need contain an arhive
of old business.

Nonsense! Archiving old business makes it possible to rehash old arguments
long after they might have died a natural death and/or become irrelevant.