Re: apple.cabi.net and the A2-Delphi forum-- time to share?

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Jeff Blakeney writes ...
> 
> On Thu, 08 Apr 1999 20:23:33 -0500, Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>
> wrote:
> 
> >     Naturally. However, the question centers around why you choose to place your
> >archive of Apple II materials on such a site. If a goal is to get more users to
> >connect to Delphi with their Apple II's, why close off a major source of the software
> >which makes this possible?
> 
> Huh?  If any Apple II user wishes to do anything online using a modem
> they need to get some form of communications software before they can
> access anything online.  This means that until they get such software,
> they can't even call Delphi so any communications software that is
> there is not needed by them to connect to Delphi so it isn't being
> closed off from them.
> 
> What you propose is a chicken and egg theory.  Connect to Delphi to
> get communications software.  How do I connect to Delphi.  Use
> communications software to connect to Delphi.  Continue looping
> infinitely.
> 
> You need communications software before you can do any communications
> related stuff with your Apple II.
>

     Actually, my focus was not on Apple II users in 4th-World countries.

     In most places, the Apple II owner would double-click the Netscape icon on
his/her PC, zip over to Ground, 'Cabi', or Cal-tech and download the A2 comm
software. Unfortunately, some of it is bottled up on a for-pay site which doesn't
even support ftp access.


 
> >     In a similar vein, if the purpose of "The Lamp" is to communicate news to Apple
> >II users, why keep it bottled up on a for-pay site and leave 99% of Apple II users
> >with out-of-date back issues?
> 
> Again, that is not up to Delphi, Syndicomm or the staff of the A2 and
> A2Pro forums on Delphi.  That is up to the author.
>

     Doesn't matter all that much. It was just an idea to get more readers.

 
> >> Let me also state that many Syndicomm staff members have been running
> >> Apple II (and other) forums for 15 years or more. They know what they
> >> are doing. They know what works and what doesn't.
> >>
> >     So do the guys who run Ground and the other free archives.
> 
> Personally, meaning no offense to anyone, I've always found that the
> ground site has very poor organization for an FTP site.
>

     Tsk! One detects the taint of jealousy. I'm sure the Delphi archives are very
nice; but, really, it takes years and the contributions of thousands of users to an
open, free archive to build up a collection like the one on Ground. 


 
> >     If Syndicomm can get paid for what it does, good for Syndicomm.
> 
> You say this here but later on you complain about how if Syndicomm
> were making any real money they would be capitalistic.  Which is it?
> Do you think it is fine if someone can make a buck off of their
> products/services to Apple II users or do you condemn them for not
> making everything they do free of charge?
>

LOL! There is no "Which is it" involved. Capitalism is good. In the above situation
and later on my position is that 'making a buck' is a perfectly fine thing to do.

     Tony's observation was that the income for managing the site was small and not
an important factor and that the work is done by volunteers. If making a buck is not
an important factor, then, logically, what really matters is having control-- i.e.
'turf'.


 
> >> Keep in mind that there is a whole team of =volunteer= staff
> >> members who maintain the forums on a daily basis. These volunteers spend
> >> their free time making sure everything runs smoothly. These forums are
> >> not intended to be unmoderated free-for-alls. That sort of thing is
> >> available right here on Usenet and on various ftp sites.
> >
> >     We call it "Free Speech".
> 
> Call it what you want, I still prefer the "nice" atmosphere of
> Delphi's forums to here.  I continue to read the messages here every
> day but it is rather annoying have to wade through the off topic posts
> and flames, which have been fairly low lately, thank goodness.
>

     Don't know about that. Every once in a while, I kind of miss the 'wars'. Like,
the business about "poison running in your veins" from Natey-- cool!

 
> >     Good. Since Syndicomm has nothing to lose and users have something to gain, why
> >not make the files freely accessible on an open site?
> 
> You still don't get it do you.  Users have nothing to gain if the
> files on Delphi are made "freely accessible on an open site".  There
> are few to no files on Delphi that are not already "freely accessible
> on an open site" with the exception of the ones that can't be made
> available that way because of distribution restrictions placed on them
> by their respective authors.
> 
> And again, this is a restriction that the authors placed on their work
> and there is nothing Delphi, Syndicomm or the staff of the A2 and
> A2Pro forums can do about it.
>

     You guys seem to constantly be pleading non-responsibility for anything. Like,
the restrictions and fees are bad old Delphi's fault-- except, of course, that the
archive managers _choose_ to have the files on Delphi.

     Now, author-restricted distribution of software in the archive is entirely the
authors' fault. But, then, the A2-Delphi archive accepts and maintains the software,
doesn't it?-- sort of like the bar owner who lets patrons mount their spotted owl and
whooping crane trophies on the wall while bemoaning the slaughter of endangered
species.



 
> >> Frankly, the Delphi database system leaves a lot to be
> >> desired. I really wish they would provide ftp access, but they don't.
> >> Nothing Syndicomm can do about that. The Genie library system is vastly
> >> superior, but it's only available on a direct-dial basis.
> >
> >     Too bad; and, yet another reason for going public. If all of the files not
> >already available were distributed among the public sites-- or, even better, all of
> >the files were hosted on a new, public Syndicomm site-- then, all users would have
> >free, easy ftp access.
> 
> They already do.  See above.  See my other post(s).  See other
> people's posts.  This has been said many times now.


     Yes. You keep trying to explain why a site which charges for access is "free"--
and how "you get what you pay for" but there really isn't that much there-- except
for the author-restricted stuff that the site promotes while not being responsible
for the proliferation of author-restricted stuff.


> 
> Can you tell that repeating this point over and over is starting to
> get to me?
>

     That may be because you can't get your story straight.



 
> >> The files on Genie and Delphi are not being hidden or kept away from
> >> anybody. Yes, they can only be accessed by paid subscribers,

     See?!


 ....

> 
> So, any bets on how many times I'll have to repeat myself in my next
> post?  :-)

 ....

     Csa2 is an open forum. You are free to repeat yourself as often as you like.



Rubywand