clubmac@runxtsa.runx.oz.au (Macintosh Users Group) (02/20/90)
Some people were offended by my use of ONE four-letter word in the Subject line of a posting to comp.sys.mac. I am surprised that such a commonplace expletive should offend anyone. Some people are more moral than their greatest martyr. When I wrote the offending piece, I was thoroughly sick of seeing the pathetic trickle of comp.binaries.mac, that averages something like 20K per day, being polluted with the SIX-PART posting of another revision of MacPassword. Personally, I look forward to seeing new stuff coming down comp.binaries.mac, slowly as it does. Another piece of CrippleWare that should NEVER be dispatched on comp.binaries.mac is GifConverter. I for one am sick and tired of people asking me how to remove the little 'notice' sitting in the middle of the conversion window, obscuring and corrupting the graphic obtained from converting a GIF file. This kind of program is unnecessary, since it offers NOTHING to the thousands of Mac users that read comp.binaries.mac. CrippleWare is a DISEASE that must NOT be encouraged! Every man and his dog will soon be thinking that it is better to release a crippled version of their 'ShareWare' (which it no longer is, since it is CrippleWare) and try to extort money from people, rather than relying on ShareWare fees. As for Werner Uhrig's comments, they are way out of line. The whole concept of offensive language is a total farce. There aren't many people who wouldn't scream an expletive after hitting their thumb with a hammer. The abuse of comp.binaries.mac with postings of CrippleWare was to me, such a blow. Finally, as a tally of responses to my offensive message, there were a total of 15 (just 15!), of which 9 where in favour of my attack upon CrippleWare postings, although they didn't approve of my language, because it would offend people. That is 3 times the response I got a few months back when the earlier posting of MacPassword was made, and I posted a civil objection to it. The truth is that I had to swear to get my voice 'heard'. This time, actually give thought to my objections to CrippleWare and the posting of it to comp.binaries.mac. Don't get your mind entangled in the trivial world of language. _____________________________________________________________________________ | Jason Haines, Senior Vice-President | | Club Mac - Australia's Largest Macintosh Users Group | | P.O. Box 213, Holme Building, Sydney University, NSW 2006 | | INTERNET:clubmac@runxtsa.runx.oz.au UUCP: uunet!runxtsa.runx.oz.au!clubmac | | ACSNet: clubmac@runxtsa.runx.oz | |_____________________________________________________________________________|
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (02/23/90)
In article <703@runxtsa.runx.oz.au> clubmac@runxtsa.runx.oz.au (Macintosh Users Group) writes: > >Personally, I look forward to seeing new stuff coming down comp.binaries.mac, >slowly as it does. Another piece of CrippleWare that should NEVER be dispatched >on comp.binaries.mac is GifConverter. I for one am sick and tired of people >asking me how to remove the little 'notice' sitting in the middle of the >conversion window, obscuring and corrupting the graphic obtained from converting >a GIF file. This kind of program is unnecessary, since it offers NOTHING to >the thousands of Mac users that read comp.binaries.mac. Nothing? GIFConverter doesn't help Mac Plus users decode GIF files, and isn't useful for evaluation purposes at all? BTW, do you tell them how to remove the notice? > CrippleWare is a >DISEASE that must NOT be encouraged! Every man and his dog will soon be >thinking that it is better to release a crippled version of their 'ShareWare' >(which it no longer is, since it is CrippleWare) and try to extort money from >people, rather than relying on ShareWare fees. Extortion? How is it extortion if I won't let YOU use MY program to its fullest extent until you pay me? Isn't this superior to the majority of software (commercial), which requires you to pay before you use the program at ALL? Relying on Shareware fees is a great way of getting no compensation, in most cases-- if crippleware allows the authors to make some money while still providing a useful evaluation, I don't see a problem with it. BTW, I don't think that MacPassword is a useful evaluation without the 'high security' protection mode enabled, but that's a separate issue. >As for Werner Uhrig's comments, they are way out of line. The whole concept >of offensive language is a total farce. There aren't many people who wouldn't >scream an expletive after hitting their thumb with a hammer. The abuse of >comp.binaries.mac with postings of CrippleWare was to me, such a blow. As has been pointed out, most of us don't scream by posting to UseNet-- if you are cyborged to a UseNetted machine, I'll accept that excuse, otherwise... >This time, actually give thought to my objections to CrippleWare and the posting >of it to comp.binaries.mac. Don't get your mind entangled in the trivial world >of language. Don't post language you know will be offensive to some if you want to get people to take you seriously. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu ][, ][+, ///, ///+, //e, //c, IIGS, //c+ --- Any questions?
jim@bilpin.UUCP (JimG) (02/27/90)
#{v_mac.10}
IN ARTICLE: <703@runxtsa.runx.oz.au>,
clubmac@runxtsa.runx.oz.au (Jason Haines) WRITES:
> Some people were offended by my use of ONE four-letter word in the
> Subject line of a posting to comp.sys.mac.
I think it was rather more the, er, 'content' (using the term
generously).
> [...] CrippleWare is a DISEASE that must
> NOT be encouraged! Every man and his dog will soon be thinking that it
> is better to release a crippled version of their 'ShareWare' (which it
> no longer is, since it is CrippleWare) and try to extort money from
> people, rather than relying on ShareWare fees.
Let's see - who suffers? Not the people who would have paid their
ShareWare fee anyway, as they will get a full-function version. So, if
anyone gets a bum deal from this form of distribution, it can only
be those who would *not* have paid their ShareWare fee anyway. Hmm?
[...]
> Finally, as a tally of responses to my offensive message, there were a
> total of 15 (just 15!), of which 9 where in favour of my attack upon
> CrippleWare postings, although they didn't approve of my language,
Some were missed - I read 24 (11 against, 9(7) for, 4 non-committal);
but one guy posted three times. Perhaps a cousin in Toronto?
> The truth is that I had to swear to get my voice 'heard'.
... but his credibility's gone down the pan. ( Bye bye ... )
> This time, actually give thought to my objections to CrippleWare and the
> posting of it to comp.binaries.mac. Don't get your mind entangled in the
> trivial world of language.
... but there were no rational objections, only hysterical ranting. Even
so, it got rather more consideration than the conniption deserved.
--
Another Fine Product from <mcvax!ukc!icdoc!bilpin!jim> <jim@bilpin.uucp>
{JimG : Hatfield, England}
Light up a legend ( become a memory )bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) (03/02/90)
In article <2529@bilpin.UUCP>, jim@bilpin.UUCP (JimG) writes: > Let's see - who suffers? Not the people who would have paid their > ShareWare fee anyway, as they will get a full-function version. So, if > anyone gets a bum deal from this form of distribution, it can only > be those who would *not* have paid their ShareWare fee anyway. Hmm? > But is crippleware shareware? If not, then posting it consititutes posting ads to the net. BIG ads. ******************************************************************** * * * bob church bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu * * * * If economics isn't an "exact" science why do computers crash * * so much more often than the stock market? * * bc * ********************************************************************
bytebug@dhw68k.cts.com (Roger L. Long) (03/04/90)
In article <703@runxtsa.runx.oz.au> Jason Haines writes: >When I wrote the offending piece, I was thoroughly sick of seeing the pathetic >trickle of comp.binaries.mac, that averages something like 20K per day, being >polluted with the SIX-PART posting of another revision of MacPassword. Well, it's not 20K per day, and if that's all you're receiving, you'd best have the news administrator down there look into where all your news is going. Comp.binaries.mac is posted at an average rate of 84K per day, at which rate it stays near the bottom of the top-10 list of newsgroups sorted by volume. This volume, which is nearly 2.5MB per month, was negotiated in the early days of the group with the backbone sites, who were considering dropping the binary groups because of high volume and limited usefulness to many sites. Even so, there are many sites today who refuse to pass comp.binaries.*. Thus, I consider my job as moderator is more to see that things go out in a somewhat uniform manner at a rate acceptable to the majority of the net. I don't consider it part of my duties to evaluate the usefulness of a particular posting; comp.binaries.mac is not mac.software.that.roger.thinks.is.useful. -- Roger L. Long bytebug@dhw68k.cts.com