The ACF faq.

[omega]

1.) Insults and attacks don't tend to work constructively (are at best
last-resort desperate measures, when no other route seems feasible)

2.) Humans are imitative creatures, fundamental nature of our species

Agree totally

Datum to note. It sure seems that top-posting has drastically dropped --
concurrent with the reprieve from flames about it.

Exists good reason to believe the resident flamers here caused the net
effect of increasing those behaviors they attacked.

 

[Tiger]

1.) Insults and attacks don't tend to work constructively (are at
best
last-resort desperate measures, when no other route seems
feasible)


2.) Humans are imitative creatures, fundamental nature of our
species


Datum to note. It sure seems that top-posting has drastically
dropped -- concurrent with the reprieve from flames about it.

Exists good reason to believe the resident flamers here caused the
net effect of increasing those behaviors they attacked.

Possibly. Another explanation...top-posting has dropped due to the
fact that many people killfile insistent top-posters. Thus, to get
responses, insistent top-posters begin posting logically.

 

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

US and International Copyright Law? Would that work for you?

IMO, your series of attempts to create a definition of freeware that
includes ad/spy/shareware is so far off-base that it does not matter
much whether the legality part makes sense or not. I was just curious,
trying to figure out what you guys think. Thanks for the reply.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Datum to note. It sure seems that top-posting has drastically dropped --
concurrent with the reprieve from flames about it.

There's less flaming because there's less top posting. Start top
posting, and you'll get flamed. You confuse cause and effect.

 

[Andy Mabbett]

To say that adware, nagware, time-limited, demo, lite etc. is
freeware is idiocy.

Not in every case, as has been pointed out t you several times in the
last few days.

And so it starts......

What does?

 

[Andy Mabbett]

this stuff has been "discussed" ad nauseum in this group. For it to
CONTINUE to be discussed is only a reflection that this group has a
very vocal minority.

Yes. You're it.

For MK to attempt to start a thread that puts the group so far back in
time is either:

1. a troll
2. a "hidden agenda" post.
3. pure idiocy.

4. Someone who disagrees with your fixed world- view. Then again, you
often use the first three to label the fourth.

Again, (damn, how many times now?) just because a type of software
isn't freeware, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS IT
HERE.
Eh?

The vote that Susan Bugher is doing right now on *exactly this subject*
will be the clincher.

No, it won't.

Assuming, of course, that the sock puppets don't skew the results.

Another of your labels for someone who disagrees with your fixed world-
view.

 

[Andy Mabbett]

Adware, because of its association with spyware, cannot be counted as
legitimately freeware because it may collect intrusive data about
users.

Opera? How is that associated with spyware?

 

[REMbranded]

Blinky the Shark <[email protected]> wrote:

omega wrote:

There's less flaming because there's less top posting. Start top
posting, and you'll get flamed. You confuse cause and effect.

Back to squre one... this is unmoderated usenet. There is no cause for
flaming someone due to the way they post.

In my opinion, if you (anyone) are going to make a corrective post
sacrifice brevity and give a paragraph or two explaining that:

1) you are indeed trying to help.
2) you know what you're talking about, ie: not sending someone to a
defunct group, for instance, in a completely self-serving act to get
them out of "your" space.
3) expresses true congeniality.
4) does not imply that there is a single choice, you've been given
it... bye.
5) welcomes them and challenges their interests in freeware as long as
they are here.

I understand the wish for brevity. Many of these are repeated over and
over. I think the need to be congenial outranks the need for brevity
though. We are all just visitors here. No one has a stake large enough
that they can demand bottom posting, etc. It is public domain.
Everyone should be welcomed and informed in a nice manner... the
golden rule.




------------ And now a word from our sponsor ----------------------
For a quality mail server, try SurgeMail, easy to install,
fast, efficient and reliable. Run a million users on a standard
PC running NT or Unix without running out of power, use the best!
---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_surgemail.htm ----

 

[Spacey Spade]

[snip faq]

Very nice FAQ, Mr. Johansson

Spacey

 

[Spacey Spade]

shareware and adware belong in their appropriate groups
alt.comp.shareware and alt.comp.adware I see no mention of these
groups in your FAQ, its called good usernet house keeping.

if an appropriate group exists post in that group.
if someone posts shareware here, its only appropriate to tell
them to post it in alt.comp.shareware this also applies to adware.

put this in your FAQs thanks

I think a good thing to do when talking about a particular subject is to
post a newsgroup link to another group so that a reader can follow the
conversation to that topic.

For example: You are looking for your own personal ultimate text editor
and putting forth reviews about different ones you've tried and what
you've liked about each... some being freeware and some being payware,
etc. You go on to say:

"I also tried the following payware, which you can find in post:
http://google.com/groups?selm=MessageID"

It's a little cumbersome, but could make a few more people happy and
still keep freedom of speech.

Spacey

 

[jason]

shareware and adware belong in their appropriate groups
alt.comp.shareware and alt.comp.adware I see no mention of these
groups in your FAQ, its called good usernet house keeping.

if an appropriate group exists post in that group.
if someone posts shareware here, its only appropriate to tell
them to post it in alt.comp.shareware this also applies to adware.

put this in your FAQs thanks

Seconded.

 

[ss_spa]

Back to squre one... this is unmoderated usenet. There is no cause for
flaming someone due to the way they post.

In my opinion, if you (anyone) are going to make a corrective post
sacrifice brevity and give a paragraph or two explaining that:

1) you are indeed trying to help.
2) you know what you're talking about, ie: not sending someone to a
defunct group, for instance, in a completely self-serving act to get
them out of "your" space.
3) expresses true congeniality.
4) does not imply that there is a single choice, you've been given
it... bye.
5) welcomes them and challenges their interests in freeware as long as
they are here.

You forgot something in here.
At least offer some help on the original question before going into
how to post "properly" to usenet. Otherwise, it may be more helpful if
you (anyone) didn't post at all.

tim

 

[REMbranded]

(e-mail address removed) wrote:

You forgot something in here.
At least offer some help on the original question before going into
how to post "properly" to usenet. Otherwise, it may be more helpful if
you (anyone) didn't post at all.

There are conventions on how to post and I agree with them. It can be
"offered," but not demanded. Generally it incites flames from the ones
I recall. Top posters are as set in their ways in many cases as are
bottom posters.

If you go to a foreign country and drive on the wrong side of the road
there will be concrete problems. This does not hold true in an
unmoderated group. The problems are abstract. There is no law, only
convention. Suggestion is a congenial manner is about the best that
can realistically be offered.