Cannot manually reconcile investment account.
in [Quicken]
|
From: John Pollard on 1 Jan 2010 22:27 R. C. White wrote: > Hi, helpern. > >> BTW, why do you feel it necessary to be so condescending in your >> response? > > Sorry if I sounded condescending, helpern. What I really meant to > convey was frustration. And not really at you, but at > http://www.rockryno.com/quicken. > > You see, I read your messages here in the Usenet newsgroup, > alt.comp.software.financial.quicken . I've never visited > "rockryno.com" at all, except now, to check out what you are using. You > posted your question in that "forum", which made you "Register" > and everything, and probably gave you a feeling of "belonging" to > their group, and of getting expert advice from other members of that > group, advice not available to non-members. > Trouble is, the managers of that "forum" simply forwarded your > question - with no context at all except for their self-serving > footnote - to this Usenet newsgroup, where I read it and responded. Then > rockryno.com posted my response on their "forum", giving you the > impression that you had received a response from another member of > that group. Rockryno did not bother to tell you that they had > broadcast your post to the whole world on Usenet, and that the > response had come from outside Rockryno. > Why do Rockryno's managers do this? For profit! Do you see all > those ads and links on the Rockryno forum pages? Each click there > generates revenue for Rockryno. Not for those of us who actually > provided the advice - for free. And not for you. > > This Usenet newsgroup is for peer-to-peer support by and for Quicken > users. Many of us freely donate many hours a week to help our fellow > Quicken users. But we are not happy to generate revenue for leeches > like Rockryno, who simply relay questions and replies to and from > Usenet, adding no value themselves. > > That's why I may have sounded condescending, helpern. I wonder if > you will even get to see THIS post. Rockryno's managers may filter > it out so that you and their other "members" will not learn the way > their system works. As of a few minutes ago, your message - the one > to which I am now Replying - had not yet appeared on Rockryno.com. > > If you don't know about Usenet, just ask. If you do know about it, > use your newsreader (NOT your browser) to subscribe to > alt.comp.software.financial.quicken and join in our FREE discussions > of the good, the bad and the ugly facets of using Quicken. Heck, we > won't even make you Register. And, since we will be seeing your > whole conversation, not just the parts that Rockryno chooses to > relay, you'll get much better help and advice - faster - without > going through the middleman. R.C.; Thanks for ferreting out this scam. If my memory will serve me, I will never respond to another post referred by that organization. I despise cheaters. -- John Pollard
From: R. C. White on 2 Jan 2010 11:53 Hi, John. Well, I wouldn't go so far as to call Rockryno.com a "scam". You can go there and take a look for yourself at THIS thread: http://www.rockryno.com/quicken/Cannot-manually-reconcile-investment-account-20424-.htm As I expected, the site has not yet included the last few messages posted here. Chances are, "helpern" will never see this part of the discussion. :>( Or click here, John, to see one of the many posts that YOU made to Rockryno - without realizing it, I'm sure: http://www.rockryno.com/quicken/Re-Minor-Annoyance-with-Quicken-Find-20464-.htm But Rockryno is no worse - and no better - than the many other "forums" that operate in the same way. In the Microsoft public newsgroups we continually see original posts that start off with, "I'm having exactly the same problem." Almost always, these posts have been forwarded from some forum like TechArena or The Egghead Caf� or VistaHeads...or from some unidentified forum via the "vBulletin USENET gateway". These bare-naked posts never include any context because the poster doesn't know that his post is going to the whole Usenet world. He thinks he's posting to the exclusive group who belong to his "forum", so readers can see the prior messages for context - including the "exact problem" that was already described in some previous post - which he can clearly see on his screen, but we NG readers cannot. In addition to the non-sequitur problem, even normal posts in legitimate threads have to be relayed back and forth between the forum and the newsgroup. This often results in messages that are out of sequence or delayed or simply lost - carelessly or by a computer outage or intentionally or otherwise. The biggest problem is lack of disclosure by the "forum" managers, and lack of understanding by the "members" of the "forums". The biggest annoyance is the situation we are seeing here in this Quicken NG: "drive-by" posts that arrive from the "forums" with no context, followed by innocent non-sequiturs by posters - both here and there - who don't realize what is happening. SOME of the forums do provide a useful service. They relay questions from posters to NGs frequented by experts who can offer help, then relay the responses back to their members. SOME of the forums are actually run by managers who are experts in their own right, and they often create their own posts with lots of help. My only complaints with THESE forums is that they sometimes do relay "naked" posts, and that they don't always CLEARLY disclose to their members just how the system works. > I despise cheaters. The only "cheating" that I see is that the forum managers reap revenue from content that they did not create, and that they do not even disclose this to the actual creators. When we offer advice in this Quicken NG, we intend for readers to benefit from it. When it is propagated widely, more readers can benefit - and that's A Good Thing. But when others profit from advice we've given freely, without adding any significant value themselves, then that is cheating. The "cheaters" didn't create the situation. They are just profiting from the strengths - and the weaknesses - of Usenet. And I don't know how the situation can be remedied without hurting innocent users of the system. RC -- R. C. White, CPA San Marcos, TX (Retired. No longer licensed to practice public accounting.) rc(a)grandecom.net Microsoft Windows MVP (Using Quicken Deluxe 2010 and Windows Live Mail in Win7 x64) "John Pollard" <8plus7isf(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:hhmef7$dbs$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > R. C. White wrote: >> Hi, helpern. >> >>> BTW, why do you feel it necessary to be so condescending in your >>> response? >> >> Sorry if I sounded condescending, helpern. What I really meant to >> convey was frustration. And not really at you, but at >> http://www.rockryno.com/quicken. >> >> You see, I read your messages here in the Usenet newsgroup, >> alt.comp.software.financial.quicken . I've never visited >> "rockryno.com" at all, except now, to check out what you are using. You >> posted your question in that "forum", which made you "Register" >> and everything, and probably gave you a feeling of "belonging" to >> their group, and of getting expert advice from other members of that >> group, advice not available to non-members. >> Trouble is, the managers of that "forum" simply forwarded your >> question - with no context at all except for their self-serving >> footnote - to this Usenet newsgroup, where I read it and responded. Then >> rockryno.com posted my response on their "forum", giving you the >> impression that you had received a response from another member of >> that group. Rockryno did not bother to tell you that they had >> broadcast your post to the whole world on Usenet, and that the >> response had come from outside Rockryno. >> Why do Rockryno's managers do this? For profit! Do you see all >> those ads and links on the Rockryno forum pages? Each click there >> generates revenue for Rockryno. Not for those of us who actually >> provided the advice - for free. And not for you. >> >> This Usenet newsgroup is for peer-to-peer support by and for Quicken >> users. Many of us freely donate many hours a week to help our fellow >> Quicken users. But we are not happy to generate revenue for leeches >> like Rockryno, who simply relay questions and replies to and from >> Usenet, adding no value themselves. >> >> That's why I may have sounded condescending, helpern. I wonder if >> you will even get to see THIS post. Rockryno's managers may filter >> it out so that you and their other "members" will not learn the way >> their system works. As of a few minutes ago, your message - the one >> to which I am now Replying - had not yet appeared on Rockryno.com. >> >> If you don't know about Usenet, just ask. If you do know about it, >> use your newsreader (NOT your browser) to subscribe to >> alt.comp.software.financial.quicken and join in our FREE discussions >> of the good, the bad and the ugly facets of using Quicken. Heck, we >> won't even make you Register. And, since we will be seeing your >> whole conversation, not just the parts that Rockryno chooses to >> relay, you'll get much better help and advice - faster - without >> going through the middleman. > > R.C.; Thanks for ferreting out this scam. > > If my memory will serve me, I will never respond to another post referred > by that organization. > > I despise cheaters. > > -- > > John Pollard
From: John Pollard on 2 Jan 2010 12:26 R. C. White wrote: > Hi, John. > > Well, I wouldn't go so far as to call Rockryno.com a "scam". > > You can go there and take a look for yourself at THIS thread: > http://www.rockryno.com/quicken/Cannot-manually-reconcile-investment-account-20424-.htm > > As I expected, the site has not yet included the last few messages > posted here. Chances are, "helpern" will never see this part of the > discussion. >>> ( > > Or click here, John, to see one of the many posts that YOU made to > Rockryno - without realizing it, I'm sure: > http://www.rockryno.com/quicken/Re-Minor-Annoyance-with-Quicken-Find-20464-.htm > > But Rockryno is no worse - and no better - than the many other > "forums" that operate in the same way. In the Microsoft public > newsgroups we continually see original posts that start off with, > "I'm having exactly the same problem." Almost always, these posts > have been forwarded from some forum like TechArena or The Egghead > Caf� or VistaHeads...or from some unidentified forum via the > "vBulletin USENET gateway". These bare-naked posts never include any > context because the poster doesn't know that his post is going to the > whole Usenet world. He thinks he's posting to the exclusive group > who belong to his "forum", so readers can see the prior messages for > context - including the "exact problem" that was already described in > some previous post - which he can clearly see on his screen, but we > NG readers cannot. > In addition to the non-sequitur problem, even normal posts in > legitimate threads have to be relayed back and forth between the > forum and the newsgroup. This often results in messages that are out > of sequence or delayed or simply lost - carelessly or by a computer > outage or intentionally or otherwise. > > The biggest problem is lack of disclosure by the "forum" managers, > and lack of understanding by the "members" of the "forums". The > biggest annoyance is the situation we are seeing here in this Quicken > NG: "drive-by" posts that arrive from the "forums" with no context, > followed by innocent non-sequiturs by posters - both here and there - > who don't realize what is happening. > SOME of the forums do provide a useful service. They relay questions > from posters to NGs frequented by experts who can offer help, then > relay the responses back to their members. SOME of the forums are > actually run by managers who are experts in their own right, and they > often create their own posts with lots of help. > My only complaints > with THESE forums is that they sometimes do relay "naked" posts, and > that they don't always CLEARLY disclose to their members just how the > system works. Which I believe is the "scam". Those forums can't afford to allow their posters so know what's really happening or they would lose those "eyes" they need to make money. >> I despise cheaters. > > The only "cheating" that I see is that the forum managers reap > revenue from content that they did not create, and that they do not > even disclose this to the actual creators. When we offer advice in > this Quicken NG, we intend for readers to benefit from it. When it > is propagated widely, more readers can benefit - and that's A Good > Thing. But when others profit from advice we've given freely, > without adding any significant value themselves, then that is > cheating. Yes, I was referring to those that are profiting; not the presumed innocent posters. > The "cheaters" didn't create the situation. They are just profiting > from the strengths - and the weaknesses - of Usenet. But that's the usual case when cheating takes place, I believe. Cheaters want something for nothing; they don't usually expend any more effort than necessary ... and there are plenty of opportunities for them ... especially in free and open societies. Not much of a defense though. > And I don't know how the situation can be remedied without hurting > innocent users of the system. Education would be my first choice. I don't see how any innocent users will be hurt by knowing that they can come directly to this newsgroup (or to the Quicken Live Commuity) for example and get the same answers they would have gotten before ... without the middleman and the advertising. If the forums in question had something legitmate to offer, they wouldn't need to disguise what they're doing. Some enterprising souls should be able to come up with ways to get the word out over the internet. If there are posts exposing the problem and a dearth of responses to posts from forums like rockryno; perhaps their revenue source will eventually dry up. -- John Pollard
From: Mike Blake-Knox on 3 Jan 2010 15:00 In article <hhnvk2$a8u$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John Pollard wrote: > Education would be my first choice. Do you think adding a signature tag (to regular posters' signatures) pointing the reader to usenet would be enough education? Or, would a functional tag be too complicated for users not even aware of Usenet? The obvious ones would include something like news://alt.comp.software.financial.quicken which probably won't work on many PCs, especially the ones owned by people who don't use Usenet. Or would the relayers just filter out that tag line? Mike
From: John Pollard on 3 Jan 2010 23:54 Mike Blake-Knox wrote: > In article <hhnvk2$a8u$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, John Pollard > wrote: >> Education would be my first choice. > > Do you think adding a signature tag (to regular posters' signatures) > pointing the reader to usenet would be enough education? Or, would a > functional tag be too complicated for users not even aware of Usenet? > The obvious ones would include something like > news://alt.comp.software.financial.quicken which probably won't work > on many PCs, especially the ones owned by people who don't use Usenet. > Or would the relayers just filter out that tag line? This is not my area of expertise. But my thought, when I suggested "education", was anything that got the message out that this sort of scam was going on. I'm not foolish enough to think that the television networks would voluntarily publish this, much less the school system: but today, we do not need to depend on traditional methods for the dispensing of information that results in "education". Anyone can now publish the sort of information that can bring down a scam ... be it a rockryno scam or a Dan Rather lie. -- John Pollard
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Prev: Quicken Budget Report using Accrual Basis Next: Q2008 H & B and Win 7 64 bit |