The Great $Pricelessware $Racket
in [Freeware]
|
From: H-Man on 27 Jul 2010 10:58 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:17:18 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: > H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in news:4c4dc133$0$50351 > $892e0abb(a)auth.newsreader.octanews.com: > >> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:20:11 -0700, John Corliss wrote: >> >>> Craig wrote: >>>> Does anyone remember when pricelessware was something valued in this >>>> group? Does anyone want it to continue? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 07/24/2010 08:58 PM, Bear Bottoms wrote: >>>>> --The Great $Pricelessware $Racket-- >>> >>> I for one would like to see it continue, but with all the forgeries >>> going on in this group I don't believe it's possible any longer. >> >> I agree with you on this John. I also would like to see it continue, if >> possible. >> > > No. It is website business and should be conducted in it's own forum. I disagree, it directly discusses freeware and is IMO on topic here. If your opinion differs, then so be it. -- HK
From: H-Man on 27 Jul 2010 12:00 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:14:23 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: > H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in news:i2ms6b$5c4$1(a)news.eternal- > september.org: > >> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:17:18 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: >> >>> H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in news:4c4dc133$0$50351 >>> $892e0abb(a)auth.newsreader.octanews.com: >>> >>>> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:20:11 -0700, John Corliss wrote: >>>> >>>>> Craig wrote: >>>>>> Does anyone remember when pricelessware was something valued in this >>>>>> group? Does anyone want it to continue? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 07/24/2010 08:58 PM, Bear Bottoms wrote: >>>>>>> --The Great $Pricelessware $Racket-- >>>>> >>>>> I for one would like to see it continue, but with all the forgeries >>>>> going on in this group I don't believe it's possible any longer. >>>> >>>> I agree with you on this John. I also would like to see it continue, if >>>> possible. >>>> >>> >>> No. It is website business and should be conducted in it's own forum. >> >> I disagree, it directly discusses freeware and is IMO on topic here. If >> your opinion differs, then so be it. >> > > No it isn't. That PL process is for submitting/voting freeware to be listed > on a Website. This group is for the discussion of freeware and it's > particular attributes and not anything else, including voting for freeware > to be placed on someone's list, or voting for webmasters for that website, > or anything else in that arena. Okay so your opinion differs you have that right. BTW, how does "Dell ships motherboard with malicious code" fall under the requirement that "This group is for the discussion of freeware and it's particular attributes and not anything else"? My opinion is that the PL vote directly discusses the merits of different freeware, so I'm okay with it. Discussion of the site, a freeware site, is more on topic than what Dell did or did not embed in their servers mobos. JMO mind you. -- HK
From: H-Man on 27 Jul 2010 12:21 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:10:38 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: > H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in > news:i2mvro$mqa$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > >> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:14:23 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: >> >>> H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in news:i2ms6b$5c4$1(a)news.eternal- >>> september.org: >>> >>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:17:18 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: >>>> >>>>> H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in news:4c4dc133$0$50351 >>>>> $892e0abb(a)auth.newsreader.octanews.com: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:20:11 -0700, John Corliss wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Craig wrote: >>>>>>>> Does anyone remember when pricelessware was something valued in >>>>>>>> this group? Does anyone want it to continue? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 07/24/2010 08:58 PM, Bear Bottoms wrote: >>>>>>>>> --The Great $Pricelessware $Racket-- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I for one would like to see it continue, but with all the >>>>>>> forgeries going on in this group I don't believe it's possible >>>>>>> any longer. >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree with you on this John. I also would like to see it >>>>>> continue, if possible. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No. It is website business and should be conducted in it's own >>>>> forum. >>>> >>>> I disagree, it directly discusses freeware and is IMO on topic here. >>>> If your opinion differs, then so be it. >>>> >>> >>> No it isn't. That PL process is for submitting/voting freeware to be >>> listed on a Website. This group is for the discussion of freeware and >>> it's particular attributes and not anything else, including voting >>> for freeware to be placed on someone's list, or voting for webmasters >>> for that website, or anything else in that arena. >> >> Okay so your opinion differs you have that right. > > It isn't an opinion H-Man. It is a fact. >> >> BTW, how does "Dell ships motherboard with malicious code" fall under >> the requirement that "This group is for the discussion of freeware and >> it's particular attributes and not anything else"? > > Such is off-topic for this group and should at the least been branded as > such. Occasional OT posts are made to this group by many folks here about > things they may believe would be interesting to most readers here. They > should be labled. >> >> My opinion is that the PL vote directly discusses the merits of >> different freeware, so I'm okay with it. Discussion of the site, a >> freeware site, is more on topic than what Dell did or did not embed in >> their servers mobos. JMO mind you. >> > A vote for a freeware list on a website is not on-topic nor is it a > discussion about freeware for which this group was created for. The Dell > post was off-topic. > > That PL process is for submitting/voting freeware to be > listed on a Website. This group is for the discussion of freeware and > it's particular attributes and not anything else, including voting > for freeware to be placed on someone's list, or voting for webmasters > for that website, or anything else in that arena. I don't want this to turn into an argument about who's right, mine is opinion as is yours, and because no one makes the rules for the group, the best we can do is reach a consensus as to what most would like to see here. I must have missed something because I thought the Dell post was yours, and as it was not marked [OT], I'm guessing you are either not responsible for it, or you made a mistake. I have no problems with PL discussions here, it is far better than the constant arguing that goes on here. -- HK
From: H-Man on 27 Jul 2010 14:08 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 17:17:35 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: > H-Man <Spam(a)bites.fs> wrote in > news:i2n12j$rvj$1(a)news.eternal-september.org: > >> I don't want this to turn into an argument about who's right, mine is >> opinion as is yours, and because no one makes the rules for the group, >> the best we can do is reach a consensus as to what most would like to >> see here. > > It is a fact by group definition and Usenet etiquette that such > discussions do not belong in this Usenet group because it is always > abused. The PL folks abused their participation here. That this is an > unmoderated newsgroup, in no way excuses abuse of it. Most ISP's will go > along with this thought. Voting on a freeware list for a website cannot > be considered on topic for this group by any stretch of it's definition. > Voting on webmasters for the PWH website cannot be considered on topic > for this group by any stretch of it's definition. I don't want this to > turn into an argument either, but I will not allow this to be categorized > as a difference of opinion when it is not open for opinion. There are > clearly defined rules of etiquette for Usenet and they apply to this > group.The PL participation here is outside of what those rules profess. I disagree. In order to cut this short, you are entitled to your facts. You can believe them to be whatever you want. You may even choose to consider them facts and not opinion, that is your right, and far be it from me to take that away from anyone. It is not in your power to allow or disallow this to be categorized, only to argue the point. >> >> I must have missed something because I thought the Dell post was >> yours, and as it was not marked [OT], I'm guessing you are either not >> responsible for it, or you made a mistake. > > It wasn't by me, but it could have been my favorite sock-puppeteer (I > didn't look to see who started it). It should have been at the least > marked OT at any rate. Yes it should have. Hard to tell who is responsible for what anymore. >> >> I have no problems with PL discussions here, it is far better than the >> constant arguing that goes on here. > > The constant arguing that goes on here was started and perpetuated by the > PL participants. That is a fact of history and not opinion. I agree that it was perpetuated in part by some of the regulars, but as I recall it was not started by these participants. Either way, that as well is a matter of perspective. Bear, you seem to have issues with anyone who disagrees with you. Suffice it to say, I acknowledge your right to have such issues. I see your point, I just disagree with it. I only wish you would find a way to see a broader perspective than you do now. Should that not be possible, then fine, you have that right as well. In the end I'm just a guy with an opinion. If you disagree with my opinion, and you have stated emphatically that you do, then so be it. It is just one guy's opinion, no need to get upset about it. -- HK
From: Ari Silverstein on 27 Jul 2010 14:59 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:15:16 +0000 (UTC), Bear Bottoms wrote: > Not bad from my imposter...my little sockpuppeteer. Why thanks, Bare Buttocks.*LOL* -- Talk about F-Cars - www.ferrarichat.com/forum/member.php?u=89702
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 Prev: Bear Bottoms confesses: I am ignorant, clueless, a little boy, retarded. Next: Undelete CD/DVD |