Angry .Orgers

[Talisman]

A few days ago, "The Geek" posted a message here that was directed at me, specifically by name. I've been away from the site since I read his post that morning, but I can reply to this now ... so I will.

To The Geek:

>> 1. Talisman, don't get so angry. .Org isn't just for you and your beliefs toward scripts, its about everyones beliefs here.

That's a very strange thing for you to say, The Geek. As an active participant at this forum, I have the exact same perogative as you do to express my opinion on the subject... which I have done in this thread and in the related poll question that was posted. You may not agree with me and you may not like what I say, but that's your problem; not mine. I suggest you find a way to accept that.

Have I ever made any statement -- anywhere -- that I'm the only person who should speak up about this or that I'm the only person who should be heard? No, not at all. The claim you make here that I would or that I ever have is just ridiculous. I have something to say on this subject, so I say it ... the same as you do. It's as simple as that.

>> 2. We have been told only a minority want information on commercial scripts in this thread by staff. The poll (so far anyway!) has proven that is not the case.

I don't believe that's true, The Geek. And I don't recall seeing a message from ANY staff person where they've said this and I've looked for the reference. If I've missed something, would you or someone else point me (us) to the staff member's post? (Thank you.)

Has anyone else said that we or they don't want any information at all on commercial hacks? Of course not. I'm quite sure we all want this information available -- just maybe handled differently than you wish, is all. I believe most of us also want the option to pay someone for a premium hack... if it's something we really want and we can afford the purchase price. At the same time though, it is a valid argument to make that adding commercial advertisement to a not-for-profit .org site will drastically change the purpose and function of this site.

Many people here oppose that change because it's really hard, already, for us to find many people who are willing to help beginners learn and to help us develop our sites without charging a price up-front for doing this. This isn't just my view... many of us who lack great expertise and who've been coming here for a long time have seen a big difference. It wasn't as bad as it is now just a few years ago. More people were willing to help us without stopping first to quote their fee schedule and discuss acceptable payment methods.

Now, I acknowledge that you don't agree with all the opposing views in this discussion and there's nothing wrong with that... but please don't characterize differing positions inaccurately. That only serves to cloud this issue and that's not fair to any of us.

>> 3. In no way does that warrant a change on its own, however it does suggest that many users would feel they would benefit from it. At that stage, it only seems logical to start discussion on the best way to do this while still maintaining the 'harmony' of .org.

I don't see a problem with this. The suggestion has been brought up for open discussion and many people feel very strongly about it on both sides of the argument. It seems clear to me that going forward with this change of purpose/direction at this .org site would NOT maintain harmony within our membership at all. For that matter, this is the most contentious debate I've ever seen at this site.

There are several other alternatives available to advertise commerical hacks, so I believe those options should be further explored and developed instead. I honestly don't see that the same option exists, however, for vB owners who want to share knowledge -- as we do here -- without the added influences we get from commercial soliciting.

A "not-for-profit" .org site does NOT benefit the extended vB community it serves by allowing its members to advertise openly and to solicit their fellow members at this site.

>> 4. The poll is still new, its not a specific poll, its an informal poll, sure there are a lot of things not perfect about the poll - however at least it does put an end to the 'only commercial script authors want .org to have them here' play.

It seems to me that you deliberately try to confuse this issue.. and that's not cool. If you're trying to quote me here, then you've definitely made a mistake because that's not what I said. I would think you should know better.

>> 5. Ill skip addressing the rest of your pointed points as they are of the usual tone. Maybe if you had produced any work and supported it for others to use here over the past 3 years, you wouldn't be so quick to pass judgment.

I hope everyone here will take a very close look at this. Because this attitude is EXACTLY the problem I have been talking about. Experienced coders at this .org site should be willing to encourage/support other members here who have less experience than they do.. even when there's some disagreement. Certainly, not try to slap them down like this one just did with me. I don't know this "The Geek" person at all, other than as a username I've seen here for someone who's developed commercial/non-commercial hacks for vB. But I know, for damn sure, that he doesn't know me or my personal circumstances, either.

The Geek.... that was a nasty thing for you to say. Where do you come off talking to me (or anyone else here) like that? You think it's okay to put me down .... just because I disagree with you... or because I voice my opinion... or because I don't have the same level of technical expertise that you have? Shame on you for this. Your attitude in that post is really pathetic. :ermm: