Welcome Guest.   Make a donation to an author on the site April 17, 2014, 10:16:15 PM  *

Please login or register.
Or did you miss your validation email?

Login with username and password (forgot your password?)
Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.

You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.
Check out and download the GOE 2007 Freeware Challenge productivity tools.
  Forum Home Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
      View this member's profile 
      donate to someone Donate to this member 
Pages: Prev 1 ... 231 232 233 234 235 [236] 237 238 239 240 241 ... 391 Next
5876  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: For a good cause, please take a moment to donate some goodwill only. on: April 10, 2011, 07:49:01 AM
I had no problem voting for Quinn. Thmbsup

Of the three cards that told a story, his caught the spirit of the season best IMO.

And those perspective shadows behind the snowman family and trees! Young man definitely has that special ability to 'see' - which is so essential for anyone who wishes to become an artist.

And he's only ten? Can only imagine how good he's going to become as he gets older.

Note: I think his only serious challenger is Genice. Excellent art, but not enough story. smiley

5877  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 09, 2011, 01:25:39 PM

I wasn't criticizing you for being suspicious. I certainly was suspicious when I first noticed that as well. I was just agreeing with f0dder that in this particular instance, DrApps was forthcoming about the fact he was an employee of OC - which goes a long way to reducing the worry someone's trying to 'turf the forum.

In the case of OC, I think we're seeing more of them on forums brcause they have made a commitment in money and people to be seen there.

Amazing what startup capital can do to get the word out and tell your side of the story.
5878  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 09, 2011, 12:48:44 PM
J-Mac: he's definitely their propagandist, but at least he's not trying to hide it - and that's something to give credit for.

Strongly agree w/f0dder on that point. As long as the business affiliation is announced up front, I have no problem with somebody being a paid supporter as long as there's no agenda to deceive. Most of us need to work for a living. And getting paid to 'evangelize' a piece of tech is a common and accepted practice anyway. No point singling out any one company or individual for doing that.

Oddly I have never found this to be the case with normal apps that aren't doing anything that people deem suspicious; only with suspect apps.

(Plus that creepy smile on his avatar bugs me!!  Grin  )
You and me both, man.

I personally think they should hire Renegade in some capacity. He's done more to build a convincing case for OC (despite the fact I personally don't like how OC implements itself) than some of the official communiqués ever did. He also speaks to the concerns of developers and software geeks. And, being a developer himself, on their level.

Hey DrApps! Maybe you folks should consider hiring this guy in some capacity?

5879  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Why I was wrong about Microsoft (by Glyn Moody) on: April 09, 2011, 06:28:49 AM
DOS was a rip off (literally ripped off and tweaked for a rush job for IBM)

Actually, wasn't DOS Based on QDOS by Seattle Software Products?

IIRC Microsoft purchased perpetual legal rights to that OS in 1980 to serve as the basis for the OS that IBM had contracted Microsoft to provide for its PC. For this, Microsoft paid a one-time fee of $50k to Seattle Software, but didn't tell them ('ostensibly because Microsoft was under an NDA and therefor barred from discussing it) what they wanted it for. Tim Paterson, the founder of Seattle Software and author of QDOS, went to work for Microsoft the following year.

In retrospect, that became one of the shrewdest business deals ever made. But hardly a financial ripoff. $50k was a fairly substantial amount of money back then. Especially in an industry that catered largely to the hobbyist market prior to IBM releasing their PC.

So what about it being a technology ripoff?

Gary Kildall of Digital Research (originally: Intergalactic Digital Research) often claimed that QDOS was "largely lifted" from his operating system CP/M.

Paterson acknowledged he had extensively based QDOS on CP/M, but argued the coding was all his and therefor was a legal functional equivalent of CP/M rather than a copy.  Some preliminary and largely unsuccessful legal skirmishes early on led Kildall to believe Digital Research didn't have a leg to stand on if they went to court. So the widely hinted, and eventually threatened, lawsuit never materialized. No software patent trolling or look&feel nonsense back in those days!

In the 80s, the rule of thumb used to be something like if 80% (or more) of your source code was original, your work was considered original. That was because there was a general consensus that software was developed in an "evolutionary fashion, and therefor (of necessity) tended to "incorporate" elements  (i.e. algorithms,code snippets, standard routines, etc.) which had been previously written by others.

In the 80s, nobody seriously considered software as being copyrightable because it was regarded as a set of instructions rather than a 'creative' or 'literary' work. Instruction sets are not usually eligible for copyright protection.

And software was not considered patentable for the same reason since it was viewed more as an 'idea' than it was the 'expression' of one. Ideas, by themselves, are not patentable.

There was also a very different 'business view' of software back then.

Most PC system software (particularly the OS) had yet to be considered as separate products. It was usually just thought of as an accessory. If you looked at the PC invoices of the time, you'd often see system software and utility disks all lumped together and called something like Accessory-Std. Software Pack with a line price that read: included.

In the 80s, an OS came bundled with the hardware you bought. Mainframes and minicomputers often had complex and expensive support and licensing schedules. But the big selling point for PC was that it came with an OS which was *SOLD* to the customer rather than licensed annually. That was a major paradigm shift for the computer industry. It wasn't till much later that the notion of licensing PC software became the norm. And it was a very hard sell convincing the public (and most courts) that a "shrink-wrap license" you didn't get to read, negotiate over, or personally sign, became legally binding if you unsealed a box. That alone constituted a major breakthrough getting the public to accept that.

Simpler times.  smiley
5880  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Recommend some music videos to me! on: April 08, 2011, 06:47:22 AM
great stuff smiley
especially enjoying the "trance music on a guitar" (Ewan Dobson) thumbs up

+1 on Dobson.  Especially that first song. His time is so dead-on it's almost unreal. You could calibrate a metronome off his beat it's so precise. Amazing! Love to play a 'long set' with that guy someday.  smiley

(Are those military and Ninja costumes in reference to the Vietnam War? Or Free Tibet...or a MMORPG character...or something? Anybody know whats up with that?)
5881  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Why I was wrong about Microsoft (by Glyn Moody) on: April 08, 2011, 06:41:37 AM

>now wipe the flaw<?

If it's "Bah-stin" then "fer shaw."  Grin

5882  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Recommend some music videos to me! on: April 07, 2011, 11:59:43 AM
@April - Cool find.

Wow! a Tapatar. 'Big cousin' to the Chapman Stick and among the rarest of rare bird (as in weird) instruments... you're the only person I know (other than me) who ever heard of it. Zither meets clavichord in a portable form factor.  Even the Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for that puppy. Not even sure if it shows up on Google yet. (It didn't used to.) Grin

Didn't know about this Flint Blade however. The only Tapatar player I'm familiar with is a gent by the name of Michael Bianco. There's a video of him here playing something a little more up my alley than most stuff that gets performed on stick-type 'tap' instruments.

  Cool Thmbsup
5883  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Recommend some music videos to me! on: April 07, 2011, 08:54:52 AM
Something I've become very interested in lately is the 3-string guitar.

But first, a confession: I'm not a big a fan of The Blues.

I know it's cool to like blues music. Some people almost grant it religious status. And a few countries (most notably the UK) have a long list of "blues" players (Clapton, Mayall, et al) whose devotion and admiration for the idiom borders on fetishistic.


Maybe because my primary instrument is electric bass, I get bored holding down a groove based on pentatonic scales and a I-IV-V chord progression. I'm sure it's a lot more fun to play blues if you're a guitarist. But as a bassist, I find it 'kinda boring' after a while. (Note: a great many bass players will disagree with me on that point.)

So while looking for a more interesting role for myself when musical friends gather to commit an act of Blues, I stumbled on something called the cigar box guitar. The CBG is an American folk instrument that was popular around the turn and early part of the 20th century (ca 1890 to 1930 approx), and extensively used in various blues forms, most notably Delta Blues.

This was the Poor Man's Martin. Put together with scraps of lumber, salvaged hardware, and a wooden cigar box for the body, they were both easy and cheap to build. Most had three strings and were hand made by people who knew as much about traditional guitar making as they did particle physics. But despite their humble trash bin origins, these instruments were capable of producing some amazing sounds. And in the hands of a real musician, were also capable of producing some superb music. Many big name blues guitarists, including B.B. King, have owned and played CBGs.

And they're still being built today.

Note the drain cover 'rosette,' the eyebolt 'bridge' and what I think are inverted cheese shaker lids for 'resonators.'

CBGs have enjoyed a bit of a renaissance over the last several years as more and more musicians are discovering just how unique and musical an instrument it is. So unique and musical that it even got me (closet bass snob extraordinaire) interested in the Blues for the first time in my life.

[attach] Here's a video put together by a CBG builder John McNair to demonstrate what you can do with one of these instruments. Link here.

(Note: Guitar people!  Check out that AXL AA-DSP-10 ThinAmp Portable Amplifier he plugs into. Amazing what $139 can get you assuming you can still find one of these terrific little amps! Check eBay since they're no longer being made last I heard.)

The CBG is probably the most common manifestation of the 3-string guitar. But other musicians, in keeping with the "found art" tradition of 3-string guitar building, have adapted the concept to whatever was at hand.

Enter Seasick Steve and his 3-string "Trance Wonder" guitar...

-Seasick Steve and the Three-String Trance Wonder


Where would the three string be without Ol' SeaSick???? He is perhaps the most revered player who still graces the stage with his beat up 3 string and always leaves the crowd wanting more.

His sound is super ranchy, ultra primitive and distintly Southen in its flavor . His guitar is a generic unbranded guitar from Japan that has an old Harmony pickup added and is played tuned to G, G and B using an E string in the A position, a D in the G position and a G in the B position.


At his gigs, he often tells the story that he bought it for $75 in this condition in Como, Mississippi from a man named Sherman, who later told him he only paid $25 for it the day before. He vowed never to add another string, and that he would tour the world telling his story of how Sherman ripped him off. All in good fun as Sherman Cooper is a good buddy, who gave him the guitar having had it nailed to the wall as a decoration. A lot of the time he also adds (while picking up or putting away the guitar) that it is the "...biggest piece of shit in the world, I swear"....

from: http://www.3-string-guitar.com/

Watch Seasick and his Trance Wonder in action performing Cut My Wings here.


Gotta love that homebrew box drum (with Mississippi license plate 'resonator') he stomps out the time on.  Grin Get one of those and you won't need a drummer.

There's a pile of other videos by him up on YouTube. Especially good is: I Started Out with Nothin' (And I still got most of it left!). Link here. For this he uses an ancient and equally beat-up god-knows-what POS 6-string that also sounds great. (Where does he find these things?)

If you like roots music (or maybe didn't think you did - like me) it's well worth checking out.

Fine music by a genuine musician. Recommended. Thmbsup

5884  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: What books are you reading? on: April 06, 2011, 11:14:37 PM
Just finished The Power Formula for LinkedIn Success by Wayne Breitbarth.


Probably the best book I've seen for LinkedIn. Down to earth and very practical advice for using what is becoming the way to promote and manage your career if you're working (or planning on working) for someone.

And since most of us (including those who own their own businesses) work for someone, it's well worth the short time it takes to read this little book. Especially in these economically unstable times where all that separates many people from foreclosure is three paychecks.

I used to be a little skeptical of LinkedIn. I had seen far too many "professional networking opportunities" serve as nothing but an excuse for somebody to try and sell you something. And just as many networking "events" or "organizations" eventually degenerate into little more than an excuse to go out drinking and shoot the breeze. But I had a buddy, who was one of the early adopters, sing its praises. And he's a pretty savvy guy with as much tolerance for pointless conversation and alcohol-fueled socializing as I have. So on his recommendation I joined up, but neglected to stay on top of it. And I now suspect that was very much to my detriment. Because I'm just now discovering how useful a resource LinkedIn can be. And I've also started seeing some of its advertised benefits now that I'm actually using it.

So if you're just starting out as a recent college grad, you'll definitely want to look into LinkedIn. Ditto if you're looking to switch jobs.

An acquaintance of mine who handles corporate recruiting (i.e. a 'headhunter') told me that she's seeing the best and most interesting positions being offered/found through LinkedIn. As she put it: Nowadays pretty much any position you'd want to get will show up on LinkedIn first. Many of the big companies are doing the bulk of their recruiting and matchmaking through it. A few now exclusively go through LinkedIn for that purpose. If you want to do business with those companies, you'd better be a member.

Same goes for if you're looking to hire talent. Some of the best and brightest hang out their shingle on LinkedIn - and sometimes no place else.

If you do read the book, check out Chapter 19, which offers a roadmap for action that takes approximately two hours a week to do, and six weeks to complete.

Less than $12 from Amazon. Read it.

Note: If you're out of work - or totally broke - go sneak a skim-through in one of B&N's coffee shops. It's only 176 very fast-reading pages.

Just don't blow it and drop $4 on their overpriced coffee if you're trying to save money. Wink

5885  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: unboxing videos on: April 06, 2011, 01:20:18 PM
Unboxing videos are the tech equivalent of the Real World: Brooklyn TV show.  thumb down

Great vid. Really sums it all up, doesn't it?

I particularly liked him chucking the instructions and frisbee-ing the CDs. Grin

5886  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay on: April 06, 2011, 01:11:10 PM
Think maybe you'd like to get yourself one of these?

It sorta looks like an iPad  Wink


Kidding...just kidding...


+1 on ReadItLater. Terrific tool. I'd be lost without it. Liked it so much I sprung for the Digest option too.  Thmbsup

5887  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 05, 2011, 04:09:52 PM
the effort that's involved would be pretty substantial for little benefit

I think that's only true if you're looking at it from a purely technical perspective.

What makes OC a bellweather is its asking us to accept that a piece of software - provided by a third party and totally unrelated to the main app's function - should be allowed to scan and transmit data back to that third party without announcing itself or getting the user's permission before doing so.

Regardless of whether or not it's been happening in other places, this has not generally been considered acceptable behavior for a legitimate software product. Truth is, stealth and operating without permission has always been considered more in keeping with malware and quasi-maleware behaviors.

And with venture capital backing and several prominent software developers signing onto OC, I think we really need to see this as a company attempting to change the definition of what is considered acceptable. If it wasn't trying to do this, it wouldn't be causing some anti-malware products to flag its behaviors as suspicious.

Whether or not it's malicious, by the way it operates, OC shares cultural and technical similarities with software that is potentially dangerous.

And while so-called false positives may damage a product's reputation unfairly, we also need to consider that most anti-malware detection is based of behavioral analysis. And to have a legitimate product display such behaviors by design - and then insist the anti-malware detection methodology needs to be changed to accommodate it - creates an even bigger problem when it comes to continuing to be able detect truly malicious code that operates in a similar manner except for the payload.

I'll risk a clumsy analogy to illustrate my point:


Suppose in a certain city, several of the most notorious and violent street gangs were easily identified by the fact they wore green fedora hats and drove a certain model van. The police were aware of this behavior, so it was relatively easy for them to spot the gangs and intervene whenever they were seen racing around in their vehicles or entering buildings at a a run.

Now suppose that the EMTs in this same city decided to also adopt green fedoras and begin driving similar looking vehicles.

Now the police have a much harder time identifying potential trouble and preventing it.

Are those two green fedora wearing guys who just ran into that building going in to put a hit on somebody or rob the place? Or are they just EMTs responding to an emergency call? And is that van that just flew down the road fleeing a crime scene - or is it attempting to get a stroke victim to an Emergency Room in time to save someone's life?

When the EMTs are asked to stop wearing green hats and get different vehicles, they refuse, claiming it's not they who are doing anything wrong.

And when an EMT unit is inevitably pulled over in error, the EMTs all demand that the police stop profiling them as if they were criminals - because again, it's not they who are doing anything wrong despite the fact their appearance and behavior demonstrates strong similarities to those who are.

In the wake of this, the police now have a much harder job zeroing in on potential trouble.

And as a result, they are not as effective as they used to be when dealing with a certain criminal element.


So while it may be a large effort for small gain, in the larger cultural and technical arena, having something work like OC introduces issues that could easily be avoided if it was implemented differently.

And that is something they are apparently refusing to do even though it shouldn't present much in the way of a technical challenge for them change their software.

Just my 2¢
5888  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Why I was wrong about Microsoft (by Glyn Moody) on: April 05, 2011, 02:58:34 PM
Like f0dder said: FUBAR, mate.

5889  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 05, 2011, 02:33:36 PM
Trying to come up with a compromise that would suit both perspectives... Not sure if that would work.

Try to think "in principle" and not about OC. OC is just one example. There are others as well.

I think in light of what wraith808 was saying about how the DLL works in conjunction with the installer, it's kinda moot at this point. OC is active the minute the installer loads into RAM. No getting around it.

Probably the best you can do by way of compromise is go with your second idea where the installer splash screen directs the user to review the EULA for details about what OC is and what it's there for. (see below)


Beyond that, there's not much else you (as a developer-partner) can do with the way OC currently is set up to work. Or at least nothing short of deciding not to use OC at all.

Besides, if people can't be bothered to at least look at the EULA, there's little to be done for them. Much as it galls me to say it, that's the sad truth of the matter. And life is way too short to get super hung-up trying to help people who don't really care about what you're trying to help them with. It's just "horses to water" at that point..

Onward! Thmbsup


P.S. Nice splash screen design BTW. Really like that camera graphic. Thmbsup

5890  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 05, 2011, 02:18:12 PM
I'm going to go back to your definition of installation (you knew that was going to happen... didn't you? Wink).  At the time that this dialog would be accessed, the open candy dll would already be in memory.  There's no way around it.  The installers don't dynamically link the DLLs so that they only load them on demand.  They decompress the payload, put it in a temp directory, and run with the bootstrapper linked to the resources in that directory.

Yeah. This is where OC's real 'innovation' lies IMO.

And from my perspective, that's what makes it unacceptable.

I'd be happier if OC provided the partner developers with a full installer that the devs could load their application into rather than the other way around.

But I doubt that will ever happen for a variety of technical, legal, and business reasons.

As a result, I'm probably never going to be able to agree with OC that theirs is a proper and acceptable way to do things. Fortunately for them, it's not my opinion that controls the marketplace.

So no problem. It's their decision and their product. They can do things however they think best. And if people are willing to go along with it...well...so be it.


5891  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay on: April 05, 2011, 01:59:32 PM
Just wear a black trash bag, and keep chanting Tekeli-li! Tekeli-li! ... Se we can blend in when they take over...

Ah yes! Tekeli-li...The Chant of the Elder Penguins - creators of Linux!

(Have to get a white apron to complete the ensemble however...)



Little Cthullu. Not dead. Not dreaming. Just sleepy!

5892  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Ever Have a Download Site Blow You Away? on: April 05, 2011, 12:23:18 PM

Same thing as above, only written as above. (40Hz - don't click~! smiley )


5893  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Fast/Responsive programs: An official SuperboyAC list on: April 05, 2011, 12:20:02 PM
@40hz: how do you rate Tomahawk / Tomahawk Gold against PolyEdit and Softmaker's TextMaker?

Not too familiar with PolyEdit.

I'd put Tomahawk on par with TextMaker for useful features. Either one should do fine for most people.

I have both. I like both.

I have a very slight preference for Tomahawk - although not for any good reason I can put my finger on. It's probably only because I've used it longer than TextMaker. I can be a putz like that at times. redface

Note: occasionally Softmaker puts their 'complete' office suite license on sale for about the same price as Tomahawk. If you want a nice spreadsheet to go with your wordprocessor, grab it when you see it hovering in the $35 range.


5894  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay on: April 05, 2011, 11:48:39 AM
Every time someone buys a Fruit Pad Cthulhu eats a kitten.


And another Shoggoth springs into existence in our dimension.

(If we don't knock it off, we're gonna be up to our asses in Shoggoths pretty soon...) undecided



5895  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Why I was wrong about Microsoft (by Glyn Moody) on: April 05, 2011, 09:04:30 AM
^ How's that old saying go? Something like: it's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission- and a plea for forgiveness is also much more likely to be granted?

Looks like somebody found a business use for it's wisdom.  Grin
5896  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 05, 2011, 06:41:57 AM
@JavaJones + Renegade


Soon as something is finalized I'll post links.

Or at least for the one that's a public site. (FYI: this site is where the rational discussion is taking place.)

The other is a 'company private' site so I likely won't be able to provide reachable links for that one. I will ask if it's ok to share the text of their site's policy when it's finished however.

As of right now it's still in the "draft for comment" phase at both places.

No ETA as to when it may be done. I'll update when I know more. smiley

5897  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 05, 2011, 02:27:00 AM

I'm not sure I know what site you're talking about.

Did I miss something?

No. Sorry. I wasn't talking about here. (I have a life outside DoCo, although you'd probably never suspect it based on the amount of times I post here. Grin)

I'm involved with a few other websites where the OC question came up. One discussion has been very rational and displays admirable restraint despite opinions running very high. The other site has been a screaming free for all.

Makes me appreciate this place even more.

Any links?

Not yet. It's still going back and forth in both places. About the only thing that's sure is that the ruling consensus is that the presence of OC is not sufficient reason to have the containing product be seen as malware.

So that's a victory for OC and its partners. smiley
5898  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Movies I Love to Listen To: Dialects and Accents on: April 05, 2011, 01:56:50 AM
I'm gonna add In Bruges.

Excellent excellent excellent choice.

Chocolat is one of my all-time favourites. Strange how with just a little change in the direction it could have been a real chiller.

Wow! What an intriguing idea. And you're absolutely right. Just a tiny change would do it. Hmm...


What else?  Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, The African Queen. Any number of Thirties "screwball" comedies, but especially Bringing up Baby, His Girl Friday, and The Philadelphia Story. Scaramouche. Kiss Me Kate. West Side Story.

All superb. Love that stilted 30s pseudo-posh dialect and accent that AFAIK was never spoken by any American except while on the silver screen.

Bringing Up Baby is one of my all-time favs. The fictitious Riverdale was based on New Canaan CT, a few towns over from where I live too!


I was just thinking, you could also add Desk Set. The dialog and diction in the exchanges between Hepburn and Tracy are priceless. Thmbsup

5899  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 05, 2011, 12:10:54 AM
In the end, I don't think anyone is going to be persuaded by a few words, but by their own thoughts, if at all.  And if your own thoughts are towards one end of the spectrum or the other, it is less likely that introspection is to happen.  So I look at threads like this more for information sharing and debate.  And I just wanted to keep it that way.


Perhaps I'm a bit sensitive because I've been in some very "introspective" (and occasionally yelling & screaming) discussions about OC in a few other places where I have administrative responsibilities.

Despite my misgivings about OC, I'm one of the people that voted against excluding "OC loaded" software from reviews, or otherwise banning it. Or at least so far I have.

FWIW, it looks like the policy is going to be that the developer gets asked up front if his/her installer uses Open Candy or any other marketing/advertising add-on.

If the answer is yes, we're going to require that the product's download page clearly states so, and require any additional product installation options be set to "no" by default.

We'll include our own "advisory" the product contains OC if the product is reviewed or listed on the site. After that, it's up to the visitor to decide whether or not they care. Either way, we did our part to let the public know. End of script.

If the developer lies about it, refuses to set the defaults appropriately, or plays any games after the fact - they're banned. First time gets a warning and an automatic shot at redemption. If changes aren't forthcoming, or the developer gets caught screwing around a second time, both they and their products (all of them) are permanently banned from site reviews and listings.

Doing it this way allows the site to maintain its software disclosure and education rule, and puts the ball squarely in the developers' court. After that, it's up to them to decide whether or not they still want to be listed and/or reviewed. End of script number two.


5900  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy? on: April 04, 2011, 11:45:23 PM
which only goes to prove that I can be an idiot as well~!

I prefer to think you're just being "passionate" and "pithy" about something that's important to you. smiley

Welcome to the club! Thmbsup


Pages: Prev 1 ... 231 232 233 234 235 [236] 237 238 239 240 241 ... 391 Next
DonationCoder.com | About Us
DonationCoder.com Forum | Powered by SMF
[ Page time: 0.116s | Server load: 0.1 ]