Re: GS WorldView October 2000 update: Developers!

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

ladyphoenixxii@my-deja.com writes ...
> 
> In article <39FE88D8.F937DEBD@swbell.net>,
>   Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >      Who are those "Apple II developers" we keep talking about? What are they
> > doing?
> >
> >      For answers, go to GS WorldView's October 2000 issue at
> >
> 
> The article on Developers contains a link to a site that offers items for
> registered members.  It's not meant to be linked to in this way.


     Evidently, you are talking about the link to Bev's Appleworks 5.1 page. That link was made accessible by Bev herself. Here is the posting:

>>

Subject: New AppleWorks 3.0 uploads
Date: 24 Oct 2000 00:43:15 GMT
From: a2mg@aol.comNomail (The Apple II Mail Group)
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2


The following program has been uploaded to our AppleWorks 3.0 area at

http://members.aol.com/A2MG 

DBPix v1.0 by Randy Brandt (Complete 5.25" disk)

DB Pix adds graphics capabilities to the AppleWorks 3.0 Data Base. A new OA-B
command allows you to view Apple II format pictures without leaving the
AppleWorks Data Base. DB Pix makes it easy to cursor through the picture
entries to view an entire disk full of single hires, double hires, PrintShop,
New PrintShop and PrintShop GS images. 

Beverly Cadieux 
The Apple II Mail Group - http://members.aol.com/A2MG

<<


     Until today, users who went to http://members.aol.com/A2MG found a link for "downloads" which took them to the Awks 3.0 and Awks 5.1 download areas. (I was there last night and considered it very cool that Bev was sharing her Appleworks Y2k, etc. updates with all users.)

     So, you are criticizing GSWV because we 'publicized' a link set up by the developer and pointed to in a posting on the world's largest Apple II forum?

     Whatever, the link has been changed at Bev's request.



> I would say to Tom  that what he wrote me about his current
> activities being innocent isn't supported by this.

     Tom had nothing to do with the article.



> The webmaster is on record with numerous posts what
> the rules governing this site is.  Get permission for the links before you
> make them in this format.
> 
 ....

     Thanks for the suggestions. Really, though, an on-line news 'zine does not need to ask permission for listing public links in a news item.

     Well, then, _should_ we ask for permission? If there seems to be a good reason to ask for permission, sure; otherwise, no.

     As for rules governing site access: the usual way to screen in just those you want is to either assign passwords or to have a URL only your pals know about. Inviting the world to your 'secret' page is not recommended.



Rubywand