A minor update for Directory Opus is now available for download
(http://www.gpsoft.com.au/DScripts/Download.asp) from the GP Software
website.

Changes in 9.0.0.9:
         FTP Links were broken in 9008 by addition of UTF-8 feature.
Now fixed.

         Added support for IBM AS400 systems in FTP parsing.

         Fixed (really!) the opening of Office documents from Opus on
64-bit  systems.

Thanks to those who reported some small issues overnight with the 9008
version. We have made a
very minor change to this and updated the download files. If you
downloaded the program before
11.30 am August 30th Australian time (GMT+10), please re-download and
reinstall.

You can check by looking at the DOpus.exe program file version. The
latest is program version is
now 3.0.19.2 date 10:48am 30/8/07

This update fixes the reported issues with Folder Tabs not closing
when new a tab group or style
is loaded, and the 100% CPU usage on startup issue that affected a few
people.

An  update for Directory Opus is now available for download from the
GP Software website
(http://www.gpsoft.com.au/DScripts/Download.asp).

Version 9.0.0.8 - August 28th 2007

New Features and minor changes:
          Several improvements have been made to the
Lister Search Field ("find-as-you-type" field):

          Special handling has been implemented for the case when a
single letter is pressed
repeatedly at the beginning of the search string. This is to mimic the
behaviour of searching with
the search field disabled. For example, you can now press T repeatedly
to scroll through all files
beginning with T.


          The "command mode" activated by pressing ">" has been
supplemented with an additional
mode activated by pressing "?" (question-mark). This mode launches
programs as MS-DOS batch
functions (the equivalent of a toolbar button that is set to MS-DOS
mode.) The console window that
is opened will additionally stay open, allowing you to read the output
of any command or run
further commands.


          In both command modes (">" and "?") you can now add the name
of the currently selected
(focused) file to the command line by pressing control-enter. You can
also scroll up and down the
files using the up and down cursor keys, progressively adding
filenames to the command line with
control-enter.


          There is a new filter mode that is activated by pressing "*"
(asterisk). In filter mode,
the string typed acts the same as a View Filter field, filtering out
all files and folders that
don't contain the entered string. When in this mode, pressing escape
to close the search field
clears the filter – to close the search field leaving the filter in
place, press the enter key.


          There is a new select mode that is activated by pressing ":"
(colon). In this mode, all
files and folders that contain the entered string are selected, and
all others are deselected.
When in this mode, pressing escape to close the search field deselects
all files. To close the
search field leaving the current selections in place, press the enter key.


          The CLI command has several new arguments that can be used to
open the search field
locked into a particular mode. Note that when opened this way, the
leading character is no longer
used to determine the mode. You can use these commands to make use of
the search field
functionality even if you have it turned off generally via
Preferences. For example, you could set
up a hotkey to initiate the filtering ability via CLI QUICKFILTER. The
arguments are QUICKFIND,
QUICKGO, QUICKCMD, QUICKDOSCMD, QUICKFILTER, QUICKFTPCMD and
QUICKSELECT. All of these arguments
can optionally take a string parameter which is used to pre-initialize
the field.

          Several improvements have been made to
Folder Tabs:

          There is a new option in Preferences / Listers / Folder Tabs
called
Use popup menu when tabs exceed available space. If this is selected
and you open more Folder
Tabs than will fit in the display, a popup menu is used to display the
additional tabs instead of
the left/right scroll buttons.

          There is a new option called
Display drive letter in tab label. If selected, and the path in a
Folder Tab has a drive letter,
the letter will be shown before the folder name in the tab label.

          There is a new option called
Display tabs at the top and bottom in dual/horizontal mode. When this
is selected, and the Lister
is in dual-display mode with a horizontal layout, the tabs for the top
file display are displayed
at the bottom and the tabs for the bottom file display are displayed
at the top (so the two rows
of tabs are immediately adjacent to each other.)

          There is a new type of locked folder tab:
Locked (reuse unlocked tab). In this mode, a double-clicked folder
will be opened in the first
unlocked tab that is found. Only if there are no unlocked tabs will a
new tab be opened.

          The folder tab context menu has been rearranged slightly. The
Tab Groups sub-menu has
been moved to the top, and the tab locking options have been moved to
a sub-menu.


          There is a new
Expand all tabs to Listers command available from the folder tab bar
context menu (right-click on
the empty space to the right of the folder tabs). This command causes
all open tabs to be closed
and new Listers opened in their place. The raw command for this
functionality is Go
TABCLOSEALL=expand.

          The Close ALLLISTERS command can now take the collapse
argument. This performs the
opposite function to Expand all tabs to Listers  - the command Close
ALLLISTERS=collapse will
collapse all currently open Listers to tabs.


          The Close commands on the tab context menu (Close All Other
Tabs, Close Tabs To Left,
Close Tabs To Right) by default now only close unlocked tabs. To close
locked tabs as well, you
must hold the shift key down when selecting the command. The Go
TABCLOSEALL command has a new
force parameter which can be used to force the closure of locked tabs.


          The Go command has a new TABSCROLL argument which lets you
configure hotkeys to scroll
the folder tabs. You can either specify a delta to scroll by (e.g. Go
TABSCROLL -1 to scroll one
tab to the left), or, if the new Use popup menu when tabs exceed
available space option is on, Go
TABSCROLL by itself will display the popup menu.


          You can now press Alt-Enter in a location field (including
breadcrumbs bar) to open the
specified path in a new folder tab.


          Holding the shift key when selecting Open in New Lister from
the folder tab context menu
now closes the existing tab (in effect, moving it to a new Lister)


          Locked tabs now display a lock symbol to the right of the tab
label, rather than
replacing the folder icon with a lock.


          Folder Tabs now support customized folder icons instead of
always showing a generic
folder icon


          There is a new option to automatically re-upload modified FTP
files. For example, say
you double-click on a text file on an FTP site. Normally, the file is
downloaded and opened in
Notepad, however any changes you made to that file were only to the
temporary downloaded copy and
not to the original file on the FTP site. Opus will now ask you if you
wish to upload the modified
file once the launched process has terminated. There are new options
in Preferences / File
Operations / Options to control this – the feature can be disabled, or
set to automatically upload
without prompting. There is also an option to use checksums when
detecting modifications – this
may be slightly slower but will avoid unnecessary uploads when a file
has been saved but no
changes were made to it.


          UTF8 support (RFC 2640 and ietf-ftpext-utf-8-option-00.) has
been added to FTP. This is
selectable from FTP Address Book and Site preferences.


          The standalone image viewer now has a Crop command in the
Edit menu. This lets you crop
the currently displayed image to the selection rectangle. The image
can then be saved using the
Save/Save As commands in the File menu. Also, the Save As command now
lets you specify the
compression quality when saving a JPEG file.


          The Clipboard COPYNAMES command can now optionally use
regular expression to manipulate
the names as they are put in the clipboard, with the new REGEXP
argument. This is a
multiple-string argument that can take one or more regular expression
pairs. The first string of
each pair is the search string and the second string is the replace
string. For example, to strip
off the suffixes of all filenames when they are copied to the
clipboard, you could use the command
Clipboard COPYNAMES=nopaths REGEXP "(.*)\.(.*)" "\1"


          The Select command has a new REGEXP argument that lets you
select files via regular
expression. E.g. Select .*\.jpg REGEXP to select all .jpg files


          The Select command has a new SIMILAR argument that causes all
files with the same file
extensions as the currently selected file or files to be selected. For
example, if you have a .jpg
and a .gif file currently selected, and you run the Select SIMILAR
command, all .jpg and .gif
files in the current folder will be selected.


          The Set LISTERCMD command can now trigger the Lister Zoom
function using Set
LISTERCMD=zoom.


          There is a new Select previous folder when going Up option in
Preferences / Folders /
Options. When enabled, Opus will automatically select the previous
child folder when the Up button
is used to go to the parent folder. This is similar to the existing
Highlight previous folder on
Up/Back option (the two are not mutually exclusive) but causes the
folder to be selected rather
than just showing a blinking underline.


          The End submenu option in the File Types Context Menu and
Drop Menu pages has been
replaced with new Increase indent and Decrease indent commands. This
lets you end a sub-menu
within a sub-menu, without having to have a dummy entry at the bottom
of the first sub-menu.
(Basically, in the old system, a menu item could only terminate a
single level of sub-menus,
making nested sub-menus more complicated. Now, a menu item can
terminate any level of sub-menus.)


          Pressing the zoom in/zoom out buttons in the image viewer
when the current zoom level is
`Fit to page' now zooms to the most appropriate level automatically
(e.g., if `Fit to page'
results in an effective zoom size of 75%, zooming in would jump to
100%, and zooming out would go
to 50%)


          There is a new information column available in the Pictures
category called Creation
software. This supports the EXIF Software tag as well as the PNG
Creation Software field.


          There is a new information column in the Music category
called Protected. This column
indicates whether a music file is protected by DRM. Currently this is
only supported for Windows
Media files.


          Opus is now able to extract metadata from Windows Media files
that are protected by DRM.


          There is a new option in Preferences / ZIP Files /
Integration that lets you turn off
the display of icons in the Opus ZIP context menus.


          The noterm and .. modifiers to the {sourcepath} and
associated arguments can now be
combined. For example, {sourcepath|..|noterm}


          The slide-out navigation buttons are now disabled on the
left-hand edge of the Lister
whenever Check-box mode is enabled.


          The Cli command has new COMMANDSET and COMMANDAPPEND
arguments. These let you set or
append text to a command field in a toolbar in the current Lister.


          There is a new command modifier - @leavedoswindowopen. When
this is used in an MS-DOS
batch function, the console window will remain open once the function
has completed.


          It is now possible to send a raw command to a connected FTP
server using the Go FTPCMD
command. You can also use CLI QUICKFTPCMD which will display a command
field for you to enter a
raw command string. Any results of a command sent this way will be
displayed in the Output Window.

Bugs fixed:

          The QUALITY argument for the Image command was being ignored
unless CONVERT was also
specified (so if you had Image ROTATE as a command without specifying
CONVERT, the quality
argument was not recognized)


          Fixed incompatibility with AudioManage namespace extension


          Specifying CD /D <folder path> in a batch-mode function now works


          Google Desktop Search now works again within Opus


          Fixed a crash in the advanced function editor that would
occur if F3 was pressed without
first using Ctrl-F to specify a search string


          When generating thumbnails for folders Opus now recognizes
shortcuts to image files


          Opening Office documents from Opus on 64-bit systems now works


          Fixed endless recursion of Favorites sub-folders in Folder Tree


          Scheduled copy (offered when trying to copy over the top of
an in-use DLL) now works
properly under Vista


          In Customize mode, Toolbar fields that are partially out of
view now trigger the scroll
buttons correctly


          Fixed layout problem in Customize dialog if the dialog window
was positioned partially
off-screen and the Commands tab was selected


          Switching to advanced mode in the function editor under XP
now refreshes the title bar
properly to show the minimize/maximize buttons


          Made more changes to hopefully fix outstanding problems with
Explorer Replacement mode
not respecting the Open external folders in a new tab option.


          Fixed layout problem in the Advanced Rename dialog when the
preview was turned on, the
window was maximized and then the script mode was also turned on.


          Fixed layout problem in the Advanced Rename dialog when the
window was maximized, the
preview was turned on and then the window size was restored.


          Fixed layout problem in the Advanced Rename dialog – turning
off script mode while the
window was maximized would incorrectly lose the maximized state of the
window.


          The Output Window now has a minimum resize size.


          The File Types dialog is now brought to the front if it is
already open and the File
Types command is chosen again.


          Fixed a crash in the Find function when searching for text in
UTF-8 encoded files.


          Fixed a problem with custom category language mapping in icon
sets


          Create Folder now works if the folder name specified consists
of a number inside square
brackets (e.g.
[2007])

          The Type option in Simple Find now works


          Launching Windows Installer-style shortcuts ("special"
shortcuts that don't actually
specify a path) now works properly from within Opus


          File Collections now work when the collection name contains a
period. This also means
that Flickr accounts containing a period in the account name now work
in Opus.


          Tab Groups now allow the use of periods in the group name.


          Drag and drop of images from Internet Explorer 7 to an Opus
Lister now works.


          Drag and drop of files from iTunes to an Opus Lister now works.


          Fixed glitch where the contents of the user and full name
fields in the Flickr
Preferences page would disappear when the mouse moved over them.


          Opus can now extract PDF metadata from PDF files within ZIP
files correctly


          Tab groups that defined a tab with multiple sort fields would
cause the columns in the
Lister to be offset incorrectly when that tab group was loaded


          Fixed display corruption caused when switching a toolbar from
small to large icons (only
occurred with two or more toolbars on the one row)


          Fixed a problem with the standalone image viewer – when
toggling between `Fit to page'
and 100% view and then back to `Fit', the image could occasionally end
up smaller than necessary


          The breadcrumbs field is now cleared correctly when opening a
new, empty folder tab


          The Folder Tab Groups Preferences page no longer expands
folder aliases for display


          The Recycle Bin and System Volume Information folders are now
properly excluded when
synchronizing the root of a drive.


          The MP3 plugin now correctly handles ID3v2 genre tags that
contain an ID3v1 genre number
rather than a descriptive string


          Opus now correctly records the action when creating a
shortcut via drag and drop, and so
undo of this action now works correctly.


          The @keydown modifier and the KEYARGS argument for the Go
command now work correctly
from User commands.


          The location column now displays the correct path when
printing a folder in a collection
with the Print Folder command


          Fixed a problem that could cause folder colours in the Folder
Tree to stop working


          Fixed a problem with the Advanced Rename that could cause
regular expressions not to
work in conjunction with script mode


          Explorer Replacement mode now supports Explorer's /select
argument, so the behaviour
should now be correct for programs that normally open an Explorer
window and automatically select
a file (e.g. mIRC, Firefox)


          When making a shortcut to the parent folder using Copy
MAKELINK .. the new shortcut now
gets the proper name of the parent folder rather than being called ..


          Fixed a problem where the Prefs BACKUPRESTORE command was
ignored if there was no Lister
open and the command was run from the tray icon


          Fixed a problem in List mode where the range selection
(shift-select) starting point was
not reset when changing folders


          The A attribute was always being set for copied files, even
if the option to clear it
was turned on


          The Ask for password option for FTP sites now works correctly
(previously it would just
loop endlessly asking for a password)


          The Go FOLDERCONTENT command now recursively checks for empty
folders, and so will not
display a folder if all it contains is empty folders (and so on.)


          If you drag the only tab from one Lister to another, the tab
is moved and the original
Lister is now closed.


          Fixed a crash caused by clicking the File Collections root
folder contents arrow in the
breadcrumbs bar when no file collections exist


          Fixed a problem with the `Move To Top' command in the Icon
Sets Preferences


          Fixed a problem where a folder containing only zip files
would lose it's + in the folder
tree when it was selected


          Fixed a problem that caused the current Lister format to be
reset when changing from one
type of device to another (e.g. from hard disk to removable disk)


          The {i:xxx} code to display a custom icon in the status bar
did not always work correctly


          FTP paths stored in the Favorites and Recent lists are now
encrypted


          FTP - Improved handling of MDTM server responses.


          FTP  - Added support for RaidenFTPD server






-------------------- m2f --------------------

Read this topic online here:
http://resource.dopus.com/viewtopic.php?p=29592#29592

-------------------- m2f --------------------

As posted in the DOpus Resource Centre
(http://resource.dopus.com/index.php):

Dear Directory Opus Users,

GP Software are pleased to announce that Directory Opus 9 is now
available for download.

The new version of Directory Opus offers many new and enhanced
features. For a good introduction to the new version please see Leo's
great online guide at http://nudel.dopus.com/opus9. For a full list of
all changes since version 8, please see the changes notes which are
available for download from the GP Software website.

All users who purchased Directory Opus after December 1, 2006 are
entitled to a free upgrade to Directory Opus 9. All other registered
Directory Opus users (including those still using version 6) are
entitled to a significant discount on the upgrade fee. Please visit
http://www.gpsoft.com.au/DScripts/upgrade.asp for a personalized
upgrade quote.

We hope you enjoy Directory Opus 9 - many thanks for your support!

Jon Potter & Greg Perry
GP Software

Hello Hans,

On Sunday, February 4, 2007, at 3:02:10 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] As we end an era... and begin a new one!:

> A heartfelt thanks from one very satisfied list member.  You have done a
> terrific job.

A big thank you! That means a lot - especially coming from one of our
biggest contributors to the group.

I hope to see you in the coffee shop! :)

Viva la texte!!!

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

Dear Wayne:

A heartfelt thanks from one very satisfied list member.  You have done a
terrific job.

Hans L






On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 18:05:45 -0000
"Wayne Howard" <solman@...> wrote:


> Dear fellow group members:
>
> As described in my message written to our group Friday, I will be
> putting this group into announce-only mode at the end of today. I have
> already changed the welcome screen for the group to indicate this
> change. Today (-5 GMT)is your last chance to send a message to the group!
>
> My goal is to help make the Resource Center your one stop source for
> user-to-user support of Directory Opus. This change is now possible by
> the installation of M2F (Mail to Forum), which allows users to use
> email to communicate with the Resource Center. A healthy percentage of
> our group prefer email as their means of communication.
>
> http://resource.dopus.com/index.php
>
> I encourage all members to remain connected to this list.
> Announcements will only be sent when new versions of DOpus are
> released or other major announcments. I promise that messages will be
> very infrequent.
>
> If for some reason the email option is removed from the Resource
> Center, I will flip the switch to make this group fully functional
> again, to meet this need.
>
> Thanks again for your particpation. I hope to see you at the Resource
> Center Coffee Shop!
>
> Wayne Howard
> Moderator
>
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Dear fellow group members:

As described in my message written to our group Friday, I will be
putting this group into announce-only mode at the end of today. I have
already changed the welcome screen for the group to indicate this
change. Today (-5 GMT)is your last chance to send a message to the group!

My goal is to help make the Resource Center your one stop source for
user-to-user support of Directory Opus. This change is now possible by
the installation of M2F (Mail to Forum), which allows users to use
email to communicate with the Resource Center. A healthy percentage of
our group prefer email as their means of communication.

http://resource.dopus.com/index.php

I encourage all members to remain connected to this list.
Announcements will only be sent when new versions of DOpus are
released or other major announcments. I promise that messages will be
very infrequent.

If for some reason the email option is removed from the Resource
Center, I will flip the switch to make this group fully functional
again, to meet this need.

Thanks again for your particpation. I hope to see you at the Resource
Center Coffee Shop!

Wayne Howard
Moderator

Leo, I appreciate that you are defending Steve, as he is (I am sure) a friend of
yours.  But the truth is that he has a really bad attitude, and you can, as you
seem to do at the end of your message, try to put the blame of  this and the
whole thing on me, but I don't think that will fly.

As I have tried to tell you several times, I was not *the least* upset that you
had move my post.  Understand?  *Not the least upset!!!*  I just did not know it
had been done until a bit later, and then, all was fine.  Understand?  *All was
fine in that respect!!!*  I have mentioned this ad nauseam.  Kindly stop beating
this dead horse.

As  to Tanis -- he kept saying "if you are so unhappy, ..."  Yeah, I found that
irritating.  It is not a friendly way of saying things at all, and I think that
everyone recognizes that.  Don't for a second think that I am the only one on
a list who has reacted to that particular phrase.  Now, I think I also admitted
that my request to him to do what I thought was a simple setting change was
curt.
I regret that, and admit it.  Tone of voice does not transmit well in writing
:-)

Now, let me mention again that I am one of the people that started using M2F
almost immediately I knew it was available.  I understand that the fact that the
subject of edited messages is not added after "[Edited]" is a "glitch" in M2F,
and that it has nothing to do with the web forum software. So, we live with it.
I have written to the M2F people and pointed this out.  Have not heard anything
from them.

As I see this whole thing, people on the Yahoo list were urged (at one point of
another) to move to the web forum.  Understandably, we had questions and
requests. They could have been addressed in a nicer tone.

"That was the first sign of bad attitude in the thread as far as I'm concerned,
and it didn't come from Steve it came from Hans, ..."   You know, Leo, I am used
to this, because I do not let people get away with their irritations. The first
time I posted on a web list, I was torn to shreds for top-posting. Torn to
shreds!  I responded with my view as to why it was as reasonable as
bottom-posting.  Well, what do you think happened?  People who had been bullied
by the bottom-poster advocates came out from everywhere and we had a great
discussion (sometimes heated), and in the end, no-one's view was declared the
winner.

Now, having said that, I hope that we can all fit in the "big tent" of the web
forum.  But do not think for one second that those of us who prefer e-mails (and
I used to a big supporter of web lists) will let ourselves be bullied.  If
someone wants to express a bad attitude, expect one back! (Although I, for one,
have been know for taking a conciliatory attitude -- seriously!).

Hans L






On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 10:12:31 -0000
"Leo Davidson" <leo@...> wrote:


> Hans, Peter, FFS, you're reading into things that simply aren't there.
>
> IF STEVE DIDN'T WANT PEOPLE TO USE M2F HE WOULD NOT HAVE INSTALLED IT IN THE
FIRST PLACE.
>
> I've said that so many times now but there it is again in caps.
>
> Honestly, re-read the two threads which I'm assuming everyone got worked up
over:
>
> http://resource.dopus.com/viewtopic.php?t=3752
> http://resource.dopus.com/viewtopic.php?t=3647
>
> Here's all of Steves posts from the first URL:
>
> > Email subscribers need to remember that there are very few of you. I
certainly
> > do not expect web posters to modify their posting styles, or limit their
edits, simply
> > to please a small handful of members.
> >
> > The Resource Centre is first and foremost a web forum. The days of email and
> > email forums belong back in the days of expensive, time limited internet
provision.
>
> i.e. Web users are the priority, but not the only one. Nothing offensive
there; seems completely rational and reasonable to me and I 100% agree that the
vast majority of web users shouldn't have to change the way they post for what
is a really minor issue for M2F users. As explained, you can always click the
link to see the final version of the thread, or just delete edits from your
mailbox. You can still read the forums perfectly well, albeit not perfectly, and
you're still getting more Opus in your inbox than without the system. Crucially,
and easy to understand for anyone who has looked at the web forums, quoting the
previous reply every reply would ruin things for all of the web users.
>
> Zeke took offense to the above as he felt it painted email users as second
class citizens. Well, they *are* second class if you consider the number of them
vs the number of web users, and also that their contributions, at least
recently, have mainly been in threads like this rather than about Opus... Yet
Steve tried to include them in the forums via M2F and other suggestions all the
same. At each stage people complained and got all touchy about the most minor
things and now we are where we are.
>
>
> >> Also, think the "Site Help" section should be email enabled for threads
such as this one?! Smile
> >
> > It wasn't initially set up for email simply because it is intended as a help
forum for the
> > website itself.
> >
> > For now I've set it up as an m2f forum - let's see how it goes.
>
> Someone points out that the Site Help forum could do with being email
subscribable. Steve explains why it wasn't before and that it is now. "Let's see
how it goes" because at that stage the whole thing is still experimental, and
for all we know there needs to be a separate email support forum or whatever. So
far Steve is still being helpful as far as I can tell.
>
>
> > Yep. I am biased against it. It's a pain in the neck, I'd much prefer it if
we
> > didnt allow it. It creates more work for me - remember I am a volunteer
> > like Nudel.
>
> Clearly this isn't to be taken literally. Nobody told Steve, "you must install
M2F or we're gonna send round the Spanish Inquisition with the comfy chair and
everything." If he literally didn't want to allow M2F then he wouldn't have
installed it. All he's saying there is that M2F, and probably the whole
discussion, is a hassle he'd rather not have in his life.
>
>
> > RSS is ideal for this. Any decent feed reader allows you to read all new
posts
> > and by clicking on them to view them, allows you to reply using the web
form.
>
> Something I agree with 100%.
>
>
> > You would think so - but the sheer lack of interest is reflected in the
subscriber numbers.
>
> Frustration because after all the effort of setting up M2F, hardly anybody was
using it at the time, including some of the very vocal complainers on the Yahoo
Group who he was trying to please but hadn't even bothered to try out the
offering.
>
>
> > Each forum is configured to send back messages to the poster. Given that
it's
> > working fine for most I would presume that a spam filter someone along the
> > way to you us culling the replies out. Perhaps you can add the forum
addresses
> > to your ISPs whitelist?
>
> Nothing untoward there.
>
>
> >> Simply M2F works and I do not understand why you say it makes more work. I
> >
> > You don't see my email inbox...
> >
> > M2F does work - and requires little maintenance - it has shortcomings and
> > problems but nothing insurmountable. That said, it's the handful of people
using it
> > that are creating the work...
>
> Nothing to get excited about here, either. Steve gets a lot of bounces and
other crap in his inbox which nobody else sees or has to deal with. And he's
understandably grumbling that a tiny number of people are causing him a lot of
continual work because they want everything just perfect when it's quite hard to
make things perfect for everyone and when, in some cases, those people could
solve their own problems (e.g. mail filters).
>
>
> >> Any chance we could get that mod added to the forum? Man would that be a
godsend.
> >
> > I've just installed this mod:
http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=309059
> >
> > You'll notice that you can now mark individual posts as unread (there's a
new button near the quote button).
> >
> > Let's see how it goes.
>
> A good idea is suggested and it gets implemented a few hours later. Pretty
good service and helpfulness if you ask me. "Let's see how it goes" once again
because it's a new mod; for all we know it's going to corrupt the database two
days later and may have to be uninstalled, but for now let's see how it goes as
it does seem useful. (In the end the mod is a keeper and everyone benefits as a
result. Other mods have gone bad in the past and meant a royal pain in the
behind trying to fix the mess.)
>
>
> >> Do you think that it would help if I deleted my account and created a new
one?
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > There's nothing in the user profile controlling this feature, it's simply
turned on/off for all users with a setting for each forum.
> >
> > It would be very unusual for an ISP to not be running any form of anti-spam
filter on their email servers.
>
> Attempting to work out why Wayne doesn't see his own posts. All reasonable
stuff and I would've said the same thing.
>
>
> > [in tiny letters] It's probably that crap Zone Alarm you insist on running 
:-D
>
> This dig is part of a running joke that's been going on for years as we've all
been trying to convince Wayne that Zone Alarm causes more problems than it
solves but he keeps on running it, even when it causes problems. I've said the
same thing in many places. (It's actually good that Wayne runs ZA since he's a
beta tester and someone has to test Opus against ZA since ZA is so popular. If
Wayne wasn't running it I might be asked to and I certainly don't want that junk
on my computer!)
>
>
> >> I am considering alternatives. Do you have a favorite suite or combination
that you like?
> >
> > Hardware Firewall/NAT, Nod32 AV and common sense.
>
> Good advice. Same things I use.
>
>
> >> It's relatively unknown in the U.S.
> >
> > It's not that unknown, even Microsoft were known to use it.
>
> No reason to get offended here.
>
>
> >> I'm taking the Kaspersky discussion offline since it's far afield from
> >> DOpus. But this is COFFEESHOP, so I'm curious if way OT stuff is still OK.
> >
> > Just about anything goes in this forum.
>
> See, he's a liberal!
>
>
> >> And something funny is happening to my Avatar. It froze, I re-uploaded it,
now it's gone. [...]
> >
> > All I can say for certain is that another admin decided that the horrific
flashing
> > animated avatar you were using was an affront to decent minded people. They
> > uploaded a version without the offensive animation (hence the 'frozen'
version
> > you saw). I can only assume that once you re-uploaded it they just deleted
it
> > - no idea for sure though.
> >
> > There's no need to have such an obnoxious flashing avatar is there?
>
> Zeke's avatar really was annoying and distracting, especially when there was
more than one copy of it flashing on screen at any one time. Slightly more so
when it seemed (incorrectly as it turns out) that Zeke couldn't see this himself
as he was using M2F and not looking at the web. The avatar was mentioned earlier
in the thread but nobody explicity asked that it be removed it and that was a
mistake on the part of the admins (including myself) -- someone should have
mentioned it explicitly -- but I'd also argue that it was self-evident that the
avatar was annoying. It was difficult to read text on the right while it was
flashing away on the left. (FWIW, It was neither me nor Steve who removed the
avatar. There are a few other admins. They did take the time to create a
single-frame version of the avatar the first time so they weren't being a
complete meanie.)
>
>
> Moving to the second (earlier) thread about edited posts:
>
> > You have a choice. Either the way it's working now, or I stop sending out
the edited replies.
> > Not much else that can be done. You could filter them out with your email
client if they're
> > annoying you. Given that most email clients provide a way to filter based on
words within
> > the subject I see no reason to stop sending out the edited replies for those
that prefer to
> > receive them.
>
> Seems reasonable. Those are the facts, nothing much we can do about it, and
those are your choices.
>
>
> >> Tanis and Nudel, I have absolutely no idea how my post wound up in this
particular forum.
> >> I subscribe to Features and Support via M2F, so this is a mystery to me.
Anyway ...
> >
> > Your post DID end up in either Features or Support - thats why Nudel moved
it - it's not
> > relevant to either of those groups. If you're going to reply to topics via
email then make sure
> > you remain on-topic in each group.
>
> Hans posted about how edited replies appear into a thread asking for help on
something else so I moved it to a more appropriate place. I explicitly explained
why I moved it but Hans didn't seem to see/understand that (maybe because he
wasn't subscribed to the forum I moved it to, although I'm still confused by how
he managed to find and reply to the thread without reading the first two posts
in it) and said it was a mystery, so Steve explained it again. Nothing nasty
here.
>
>
> > It is set to do this as well as it can. The problem is, replies do NOT get a
> > subject in PHPBB - you will notice that the first posts in a topic do get
the subject.
>
> Steve's explaining a technical limitation of M2F. Nobody's happy about the
limitation but that's how things are and something we all apparently have to
live with.
>
>
> >> It is difficult to follow discussions when there are as many edited posts
> >> as there are some times. Could you look into this?
> >
> > Please?
> >
> > Like others have said - just filter out the [EDITED] posts if they bother
> > you so much, generally they're just fixed typos.
>
> Seems like reasonable advice to me, and at this stage it was getting annoying
that so much time was being spent talking about edited posts when, as had
already been explained multiple times, there's nothing we can do about it, it's
already been looked into, and the edited posts so easy to filter on the client
side and so rarely worth reading (just typos most of the time) that people who
don't want them can solve the problem for themselves in their email clients.
Hence the frustrated "Please?" when asked to look into it again.
>
> Hans then got offended by "Please?" (I still don't understand why) and replied
with what I thought was an inappropriate overreaction:
>
> >> Tanis, if it bother you so much that I ask you to look into it (since I
thought it was
> >> a simple setting as per Daron), why don't you just refrain from responding.
I don't
> >> need this kind of response (second time from you), and I will not take it
as easily as
> >> now if you continue.
>
> That was the first sign of bad attitude in the thread as far as I'm concerned,
and it didn't come from Steve it came from Hans, one of the people complaining
about Steve today. Now, fair enough, sometimes you get the wrong impression from
an email, but FFS guys, please re-read what Steve said and think about what he
meant for a minute. If he wanted to offend you he would've said something far
more harsh than "Please?", and if you look at all of the information you had
ignored up to that point while repeatedly asking the same questions which had
already been answered, I think you might understand why Steve -- and the rest of
us to be honest -- have found this whole situation so frustrating.
>
> The rest of the thread is just a repetition of things said already.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter S . . ." <pstrisik@...>
> To: <DOpus@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 5:00 AM
> Subject: RE: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group
>
>
> >
> > Leo,
> >
> > I agree with almost all that you say, except for  a couple of points.
> > Mostly, there is enough negativity floating around.  Most of my interactions
> > in forums of all kinds are pleasant and supportive.  My experience at the
> > Resource Center has not been.  I don't care if Steve spends all his spare
> > time maintaining the site and helping people with technical questions.  If I
> > run into shutdowns, criticism and negativity in response to my input, I
> > don't need it.  Actions speak louder than words you might say.  Sorry, in
> > Steve's eyes, I am evidently one of "the poor dears who cannot possibly cope
> > without sugar- coated hand-holding."  I don't need that shit.  He's not
> > worth interacting with if that's how he sees things.  As I've said, there
> > enough negativity floating around, I don't need to purposely subject myself
> > to more.
> >
> > This email thing might have a shot, except that Steve is essentially shoeing
> > people away from it.  He wants more people to sign up in order to consider
> > it valuable, yet he's already made up his mind that there aren't enough
> > people interested only after days that most of us here even heard about it.
> > His admitted bias and tone will likely insure that there never will be
> > substantial use of that feature.  Self-fulfilling prophecy.
> >
> > There is no argument about M2F.  It's all about the attitude around it.  It
> > works fine.  There is discussion about the fine points, but no real argument
> > that I can see; no one is pushing for unreasonable accomodation or mods.
> >
> > So now I am Jack's overactive spleen, so I will unsubscribe from this
> > discussion.  I have unsubscribed from all M2F mailings and logged off.  I
> > have more important things to do too.
> >
> > C Ya.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> If Steve didn't care then there wouldn't be M2F on the forums
> >> at all. His point is simply that a lot more people use the
> >> web than email so that has to be the priority. (Just the
> >> priority. Not the only people who matter, but the group of
> >> people who matter the most. Ideally everyone can be made
> >> happy but sometimes a choice or compromise is required, and
> >> you've got to go with the majority in those cases.) All of
> >> that makes perfect sense.
> >>
> >> We're all here to help with and/or learn about Opus, not to
> >> talk about email vs web forums and other meta-discussions.
> >> Some sensible discussion of those things is fine and has
> >> brought about useful changes and improvements, as well as a
> >> better understanding between the two camps, but now it seems
> >> like it's not really going anywhere. Steve said he's not
> >> interested in further discussion of this stuff, not because
> >> he assumes he is right but because the argument is in a
> >> holding pattern, going around in circles. It's frustrating
> >> for all involved and there are better ways to spend time on
> >> the Internet.
> >>
> >> Steve has gone out of his way to make as many people as
> >> possible happy -- in terms of what he has done if not what he
> >> has said while doing it -- and the M2F feature isn't going to
> >> go anywhere unless some major problem is found in it since
> >> it's a useful feature for some people and that's a good
> >> thing. Look at Steve's actions (sorting out M2F for the
> >> people who asked for it even though it's not something he's
> >> going to use himself) and don't get the wrong impression from
> >> a few of his words (the odd blunt comment; he's an
> >> Australian, after all).
> >>
> >> Equally, at least some of the people who complained about the
> >> very idea of web forums have shown the ability to compromise
> >> and give things a chance, given M2F -- and in some cases the
> >> web forum itself -- a try and providing useful feedback which
> >> has led to improvements -- again implemented by Steve --
> >> which have benefited everyone. For example, in addition to
> >> M2F the forum now has a mod which tracks exactly what you
> >> have and haven't read, rather than just the latest thing you
> >> read. That removed one of the problems that some people had
> >> with the web interface.
> >>
> >> Some people haven't even tried it, though. Compromises and/or
> >> changes are needed on both sides to make the Resource Centre
> >> work for everyone. As far as I'm aware every reasonable
> >> change and compromise has been made on the administrative
> >> side so now it's up to the people who want to access it but
> >> didn't like it before to try it out and see if they can work
> >> with it, provide constructive feedback, and accept that it
> >> may not be exactly what they want, but it's better than
> >> staring at an empty inbox every day.
> >>
> >> If someone finds it really doesn't work for them and there
> >> are no changes which can be made to solve the problem then
> >> fair enough, that's life and there's not really anything
> >> anyone can do about it. However, Steve's track record shows
> >> that good ideas will be looked at and implemented if
> >> reasonably possible (i.e. they don't involve someone spending
> >> six months writing brand new forum software). Not everything
> >> is possible, though, and the needs of the vast majority (the
> >> web users) will obviously take priority in the case of a
> >> conflict. Also, bad or impossible ideas may be met with a
> >> blunt response but that doesn't mean Steve hates you or your
> >> idea, it probably just means it isn't actually a good idea,
> >> in the grand scheme of things, or isn't possible within the
> >> current system. That's life, unfortunately.
> >>
> >> Also, some things just aren't worth doing. For example, if
> >> you don't want to see edited posts in your inbox then it's
> >> trivial to set up a filter on your side to delete them. Not
> >> sending the edits is silly because other people may want to
> >> see them, and we've already tried disabling edits completely
> >> with negative effects. Until someone finds a mod or thinks of
> >> a better idea, that's just how things are, unfortunately.
> >>
> >> The support form on GPSoftware's web page is the only
> >> official and direct support channel:
> >> http://www.gpsoft.com.au/Support.html (And maybe the German
> >> web forums if you bought from the German distributor,
> >> although I'm not sure what the exact setup there is.)
> >> Everything else -- the Yahoo Group, the Swedish Yahoo Group,
> >> The Resource Centre, the IRC channel, people sending private
> >> emails, etc. -- is for users helping out other users, with
> >> GPSoft joining in unofficially as well in some cases. Steve
> >> isn't a part of GPSoft -- he works for the fire brigade! --
> >> but he looks after one of those places and is trying to keep
> >> everyone there happy. People can talk where they choose to
> >> talk and if they need direct support from GPSoft they can
> >> talk to them directly. If you decide to post a question about
> >> Opus to the forums then Steve is hardly going to get in your
> >> way or in the way of the community of people who will try to
> >> help with a reply, so I think it would be a shame for you or
> >> anyone else to let something Steve said something affect
> >> how/whether you use a community resource. We are all here for
> >> the same reason -- Opus -- and silly divisions and arguments
> >> aren't in anyone's interests.
> >>
> >> In terms of whether the Yahoo Group should stay around, it's
> >> ultimately up to Wayne since it's his group. I've been happy
> >> with the web forum for a long time now but have remained
> >> subscribed to the Yahoo Group in case anyone needs help. It
> >> was my hope that everyone could move to the Resource Centre
> >> by reaching a compromise with M2F or whatever (which I think
> >> works quite well, and I read the forums as much via email now
> >> as I do via the web) but my impression is that some people
> >> are still not convinced (but are equally out of ideas). As
> >> I've said a few times, I would much rather all of the English
> >> discussion about Opus was in one place and I'd hate for new
> >> users to discover the Yahoo Group without realising the
> >> Resource Centre also exists. There's far more activity and
> >> more of a community at the Resource Centre while the Yahoo
> >> Group has been very quiet for some time now, aside from the
> >> occasional on-topic post and the more frequent meta-thread
> >> about either spam or how much web forums suck. I want new
> >> Opus users to think "wow, that looks like a product with a
> >> great, enthusiastic and helpful community who will assist me
> >> and share ideas with me" and I don't think anyone would get
> >> that impression from the Yahoo Group of today. Threads like
> >> this obviously make it look worse, but things haven't looked
> >> inviting for a while now, to be blunt (I'm 1/3rd Australian
> >> myself :)). It just feels like the group stays around for a
> >> few people who prefer email over the web (fair enough) but
> >> hardly ever say anything. I don't really see the point,
> >> especially when M2F works pretty well now and when the people
> >> who are actively discussing Opus aren't going to move over
> >> here no matter how much more convenient it would be for you
> >> to read their posts.
> >>
> >> It would be great if we all got back to talking about Opus,
> >> rather than discussions about how and where we discuss Opus.
> >> :( I'd rather not talk about this subject any more as I just
> >> spent several hours writing and re-writing this reply, on top
> >> of the hours I've already put into this frustrating
> >> discussion. I'm happy to talk about real things, like ideas
> >> people have for stuff being better, but I don't see any point
> >> in further email vs web arguments that don't actually lead to
> >> a constructive idea of how to please more people, nor do I
> >> plan to spend any more time defending Steve when I think his
> >> actions speak for themsevles, even if what he's said or how
> >> he's said it has ruffled some feathers. Steve's trying to
> >> help the same as anyone else and sometimes I think maybe I
> >> should be more brief, quick and off the cuff like he is
> >> rather than being a total bloody idiot and wasting hours of
> >> my Friday night trying to be diplomatic in a huge long reply
> >> like this.
> >>
> >> Sigh.
> >>
> >> I am Jack's wasted life.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> > User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Hello Daron,

On Saturday, February 3, 2007, at 1:06:27 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

> If it does go wrong though it can be chaotic - I know as I tried it in
> the past. I do recommend that even though it can be done it isn't :)

Worry not. I'm not doing that.

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

[quote]No, because every message would be from the same user and I am
certain
that it violates rules by Yahoo.[/quote]

It can actually be done, as M2F was designed with that in mine but the
eGroup does need the setting changing to use users email addresses.

If it does go wrong though it can be chaotic - I know as I tried it in
the past. I do recommend that even though it can be done it isn't :)

Hello UnspecifiedId,

On Saturday, February 3, 2007, at 1:52:10 AM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

> Wouldn't it just be easier to have M2F send to the dopus@yahoogroups.com ?
> That way both parties have what they want.

No, because every message would be from the same user and I am certain
that it violates rules by Yahoo.

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

Hans, Peter, FFS, you're reading into things that simply aren't there.

IF STEVE DIDN'T WANT PEOPLE TO USE M2F HE WOULD NOT HAVE INSTALLED IT IN THE
FIRST PLACE.

I've said that so many times now but there it is again in caps.

Honestly, re-read the two threads which I'm assuming everyone got worked up
over:

http://resource.dopus.com/viewtopic.php?t=3752
http://resource.dopus.com/viewtopic.php?t=3647

Here's all of Steves posts from the first URL:

> Email subscribers need to remember that there are very few of you. I certainly
> do not expect web posters to modify their posting styles, or limit their
edits, simply
> to please a small handful of members.
>
> The Resource Centre is first and foremost a web forum. The days of email and
> email forums belong back in the days of expensive, time limited internet
provision.

i.e. Web users are the priority, but not the only one. Nothing offensive there;
seems completely rational and reasonable to me and I 100% agree that the vast
majority of web users shouldn't have to change the way they post for what is a
really minor issue for M2F users. As explained, you can always click the link to
see the final version of the thread, or just delete edits from your mailbox. You
can still read the forums perfectly well, albeit not perfectly, and you're still
getting more Opus in your inbox than without the system. Crucially, and easy to
understand for anyone who has looked at the web forums, quoting the previous
reply every reply would ruin things for all of the web users.

Zeke took offense to the above as he felt it painted email users as second class
citizens. Well, they *are* second class if you consider the number of them vs
the number of web users, and also that their contributions, at least recently,
have mainly been in threads like this rather than about Opus... Yet Steve tried
to include them in the forums via M2F and other suggestions all the same. At
each stage people complained and got all touchy about the most minor things and
now we are where we are.


>> Also, think the "Site Help" section should be email enabled for threads such
as this one?! Smile
>
> It wasn't initially set up for email simply because it is intended as a help
forum for the
> website itself.
>
> For now I've set it up as an m2f forum - let's see how it goes.

Someone points out that the Site Help forum could do with being email
subscribable. Steve explains why it wasn't before and that it is now. "Let's see
how it goes" because at that stage the whole thing is still experimental, and
for all we know there needs to be a separate email support forum or whatever. So
far Steve is still being helpful as far as I can tell.


> Yep. I am biased against it. It's a pain in the neck, I'd much prefer it if we
> didnt allow it. It creates more work for me - remember I am a volunteer
> like Nudel.

Clearly this isn't to be taken literally. Nobody told Steve, "you must install
M2F or we're gonna send round the Spanish Inquisition with the comfy chair and
everything." If he literally didn't want to allow M2F then he wouldn't have
installed it. All he's saying there is that M2F, and probably the whole
discussion, is a hassle he'd rather not have in his life.


> RSS is ideal for this. Any decent feed reader allows you to read all new posts
> and by clicking on them to view them, allows you to reply using the web form.

Something I agree with 100%.


> You would think so - but the sheer lack of interest is reflected in the
subscriber numbers.

Frustration because after all the effort of setting up M2F, hardly anybody was
using it at the time, including some of the very vocal complainers on the Yahoo
Group who he was trying to please but hadn't even bothered to try out the
offering.


> Each forum is configured to send back messages to the poster. Given that it's
> working fine for most I would presume that a spam filter someone along the
> way to you us culling the replies out. Perhaps you can add the forum addresses
> to your ISPs whitelist?

Nothing untoward there.


>> Simply M2F works and I do not understand why you say it makes more work. I
>
> You don't see my email inbox...
>
> M2F does work - and requires little maintenance - it has shortcomings and
> problems but nothing insurmountable. That said, it's the handful of people
using it
> that are creating the work...

Nothing to get excited about here, either. Steve gets a lot of bounces and other
crap in his inbox which nobody else sees or has to deal with. And he's
understandably grumbling that a tiny number of people are causing him a lot of
continual work because they want everything just perfect when it's quite hard to
make things perfect for everyone and when, in some cases, those people could
solve their own problems (e.g. mail filters).


>> Any chance we could get that mod added to the forum? Man would that be a
godsend.
>
> I've just installed this mod:
http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=309059
>
> You'll notice that you can now mark individual posts as unread (there's a new
button near the quote button).
>
> Let's see how it goes.

A good idea is suggested and it gets implemented a few hours later. Pretty good
service and helpfulness if you ask me. "Let's see how it goes" once again
because it's a new mod; for all we know it's going to corrupt the database two
days later and may have to be uninstalled, but for now let's see how it goes as
it does seem useful. (In the end the mod is a keeper and everyone benefits as a
result. Other mods have gone bad in the past and meant a royal pain in the
behind trying to fix the mess.)


>> Do you think that it would help if I deleted my account and created a new
one?
>
> Nope.
>
> There's nothing in the user profile controlling this feature, it's simply
turned on/off for all users with a setting for each forum.
>
> It would be very unusual for an ISP to not be running any form of anti-spam
filter on their email servers.

Attempting to work out why Wayne doesn't see his own posts. All reasonable stuff
and I would've said the same thing.


> [in tiny letters] It's probably that crap Zone Alarm you insist on running 
:-D

This dig is part of a running joke that's been going on for years as we've all
been trying to convince Wayne that Zone Alarm causes more problems than it
solves but he keeps on running it, even when it causes problems. I've said the
same thing in many places. (It's actually good that Wayne runs ZA since he's a
beta tester and someone has to test Opus against ZA since ZA is so popular. If
Wayne wasn't running it I might be asked to and I certainly don't want that junk
on my computer!)


>> I am considering alternatives. Do you have a favorite suite or combination
that you like?
>
> Hardware Firewall/NAT, Nod32 AV and common sense.

Good advice. Same things I use.


>> It's relatively unknown in the U.S.
>
> It's not that unknown, even Microsoft were known to use it.

No reason to get offended here.


>> I'm taking the Kaspersky discussion offline since it's far afield from
>> DOpus. But this is COFFEESHOP, so I'm curious if way OT stuff is still OK.
>
> Just about anything goes in this forum.

See, he's a liberal!


>> And something funny is happening to my Avatar. It froze, I re-uploaded it,
now it's gone. [...]
>
> All I can say for certain is that another admin decided that the horrific
flashing
> animated avatar you were using was an affront to decent minded people. They
> uploaded a version without the offensive animation (hence the 'frozen' version
> you saw). I can only assume that once you re-uploaded it they just deleted it
> - no idea for sure though.
>
> There's no need to have such an obnoxious flashing avatar is there?

Zeke's avatar really was annoying and distracting, especially when there was
more than one copy of it flashing on screen at any one time. Slightly more so
when it seemed (incorrectly as it turns out) that Zeke couldn't see this himself
as he was using M2F and not looking at the web. The avatar was mentioned earlier
in the thread but nobody explicity asked that it be removed it and that was a
mistake on the part of the admins (including myself) -- someone should have
mentioned it explicitly -- but I'd also argue that it was self-evident that the
avatar was annoying. It was difficult to read text on the right while it was
flashing away on the left. (FWIW, It was neither me nor Steve who removed the
avatar. There are a few other admins. They did take the time to create a
single-frame version of the avatar the first time so they weren't being a
complete meanie.)


Moving to the second (earlier) thread about edited posts:

> You have a choice. Either the way it's working now, or I stop sending out the
edited replies.
> Not much else that can be done. You could filter them out with your email
client if they're
> annoying you. Given that most email clients provide a way to filter based on
words within
> the subject I see no reason to stop sending out the edited replies for those
that prefer to
> receive them.

Seems reasonable. Those are the facts, nothing much we can do about it, and
those are your choices.


>> Tanis and Nudel, I have absolutely no idea how my post wound up in this
particular forum.
>> I subscribe to Features and Support via M2F, so this is a mystery to me.
Anyway ...
>
> Your post DID end up in either Features or Support - thats why Nudel moved it
- it's not
> relevant to either of those groups. If you're going to reply to topics via
email then make sure
> you remain on-topic in each group.

Hans posted about how edited replies appear into a thread asking for help on
something else so I moved it to a more appropriate place. I explicitly explained
why I moved it but Hans didn't seem to see/understand that (maybe because he
wasn't subscribed to the forum I moved it to, although I'm still confused by how
he managed to find and reply to the thread without reading the first two posts
in it) and said it was a mystery, so Steve explained it again. Nothing nasty
here.


> It is set to do this as well as it can. The problem is, replies do NOT get a
> subject in PHPBB - you will notice that the first posts in a topic do get the
subject.

Steve's explaining a technical limitation of M2F. Nobody's happy about the
limitation but that's how things are and something we all apparently have to
live with.


>> It is difficult to follow discussions when there are as many edited posts
>> as there are some times. Could you look into this?
>
> Please?
>
> Like others have said - just filter out the [EDITED] posts if they bother
> you so much, generally they're just fixed typos.

Seems like reasonable advice to me, and at this stage it was getting annoying
that so much time was being spent talking about edited posts when, as had
already been explained multiple times, there's nothing we can do about it, it's
already been looked into, and the edited posts so easy to filter on the client
side and so rarely worth reading (just typos most of the time) that people who
don't want them can solve the problem for themselves in their email clients.
Hence the frustrated "Please?" when asked to look into it again.

Hans then got offended by "Please?" (I still don't understand why) and replied
with what I thought was an inappropriate overreaction:

>> Tanis, if it bother you so much that I ask you to look into it (since I
thought it was
>> a simple setting as per Daron), why don't you just refrain from responding. I
don't
>> need this kind of response (second time from you), and I will not take it as
easily as
>> now if you continue.

That was the first sign of bad attitude in the thread as far as I'm concerned,
and it didn't come from Steve it came from Hans, one of the people complaining
about Steve today. Now, fair enough, sometimes you get the wrong impression from
an email, but FFS guys, please re-read what Steve said and think about what he
meant for a minute. If he wanted to offend you he would've said something far
more harsh than "Please?", and if you look at all of the information you had
ignored up to that point while repeatedly asking the same questions which had
already been answered, I think you might understand why Steve -- and the rest of
us to be honest -- have found this whole situation so frustrating.

The rest of the thread is just a repetition of things said already.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter S . . ." <pstrisik@...>
To: <DOpus@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 5:00 AM
Subject: RE: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group


>
> Leo,
>
> I agree with almost all that you say, except for  a couple of points.
> Mostly, there is enough negativity floating around.  Most of my interactions
> in forums of all kinds are pleasant and supportive.  My experience at the
> Resource Center has not been.  I don't care if Steve spends all his spare
> time maintaining the site and helping people with technical questions.  If I
> run into shutdowns, criticism and negativity in response to my input, I
> don't need it.  Actions speak louder than words you might say.  Sorry, in
> Steve's eyes, I am evidently one of "the poor dears who cannot possibly cope
> without sugar- coated hand-holding."  I don't need that shit.  He's not
> worth interacting with if that's how he sees things.  As I've said, there
> enough negativity floating around, I don't need to purposely subject myself
> to more.
>
> This email thing might have a shot, except that Steve is essentially shoeing
> people away from it.  He wants more people to sign up in order to consider
> it valuable, yet he's already made up his mind that there aren't enough
> people interested only after days that most of us here even heard about it.
> His admitted bias and tone will likely insure that there never will be
> substantial use of that feature.  Self-fulfilling prophecy.
>
> There is no argument about M2F.  It's all about the attitude around it.  It
> works fine.  There is discussion about the fine points, but no real argument
> that I can see; no one is pushing for unreasonable accomodation or mods.
>
> So now I am Jack's overactive spleen, so I will unsubscribe from this
> discussion.  I have unsubscribed from all M2F mailings and logged off.  I
> have more important things to do too.
>
> C Ya.
>
>
>
>
>> If Steve didn't care then there wouldn't be M2F on the forums
>> at all. His point is simply that a lot more people use the
>> web than email so that has to be the priority. (Just the
>> priority. Not the only people who matter, but the group of
>> people who matter the most. Ideally everyone can be made
>> happy but sometimes a choice or compromise is required, and
>> you've got to go with the majority in those cases.) All of
>> that makes perfect sense.
>>
>> We're all here to help with and/or learn about Opus, not to
>> talk about email vs web forums and other meta-discussions.
>> Some sensible discussion of those things is fine and has
>> brought about useful changes and improvements, as well as a
>> better understanding between the two camps, but now it seems
>> like it's not really going anywhere. Steve said he's not
>> interested in further discussion of this stuff, not because
>> he assumes he is right but because the argument is in a
>> holding pattern, going around in circles. It's frustrating
>> for all involved and there are better ways to spend time on
>> the Internet.
>>
>> Steve has gone out of his way to make as many people as
>> possible happy -- in terms of what he has done if not what he
>> has said while doing it -- and the M2F feature isn't going to
>> go anywhere unless some major problem is found in it since
>> it's a useful feature for some people and that's a good
>> thing. Look at Steve's actions (sorting out M2F for the
>> people who asked for it even though it's not something he's
>> going to use himself) and don't get the wrong impression from
>> a few of his words (the odd blunt comment; he's an
>> Australian, after all).
>>
>> Equally, at least some of the people who complained about the
>> very idea of web forums have shown the ability to compromise
>> and give things a chance, given M2F -- and in some cases the
>> web forum itself -- a try and providing useful feedback which
>> has led to improvements -- again implemented by Steve --
>> which have benefited everyone. For example, in addition to
>> M2F the forum now has a mod which tracks exactly what you
>> have and haven't read, rather than just the latest thing you
>> read. That removed one of the problems that some people had
>> with the web interface.
>>
>> Some people haven't even tried it, though. Compromises and/or
>> changes are needed on both sides to make the Resource Centre
>> work for everyone. As far as I'm aware every reasonable
>> change and compromise has been made on the administrative
>> side so now it's up to the people who want to access it but
>> didn't like it before to try it out and see if they can work
>> with it, provide constructive feedback, and accept that it
>> may not be exactly what they want, but it's better than
>> staring at an empty inbox every day.
>>
>> If someone finds it really doesn't work for them and there
>> are no changes which can be made to solve the problem then
>> fair enough, that's life and there's not really anything
>> anyone can do about it. However, Steve's track record shows
>> that good ideas will be looked at and implemented if
>> reasonably possible (i.e. they don't involve someone spending
>> six months writing brand new forum software). Not everything
>> is possible, though, and the needs of the vast majority (the
>> web users) will obviously take priority in the case of a
>> conflict. Also, bad or impossible ideas may be met with a
>> blunt response but that doesn't mean Steve hates you or your
>> idea, it probably just means it isn't actually a good idea,
>> in the grand scheme of things, or isn't possible within the
>> current system. That's life, unfortunately.
>>
>> Also, some things just aren't worth doing. For example, if
>> you don't want to see edited posts in your inbox then it's
>> trivial to set up a filter on your side to delete them. Not
>> sending the edits is silly because other people may want to
>> see them, and we've already tried disabling edits completely
>> with negative effects. Until someone finds a mod or thinks of
>> a better idea, that's just how things are, unfortunately.
>>
>> The support form on GPSoftware's web page is the only
>> official and direct support channel:
>> http://www.gpsoft.com.au/Support.html (And maybe the German
>> web forums if you bought from the German distributor,
>> although I'm not sure what the exact setup there is.)
>> Everything else -- the Yahoo Group, the Swedish Yahoo Group,
>> The Resource Centre, the IRC channel, people sending private
>> emails, etc. -- is for users helping out other users, with
>> GPSoft joining in unofficially as well in some cases. Steve
>> isn't a part of GPSoft -- he works for the fire brigade! --
>> but he looks after one of those places and is trying to keep
>> everyone there happy. People can talk where they choose to
>> talk and if they need direct support from GPSoft they can
>> talk to them directly. If you decide to post a question about
>> Opus to the forums then Steve is hardly going to get in your
>> way or in the way of the community of people who will try to
>> help with a reply, so I think it would be a shame for you or
>> anyone else to let something Steve said something affect
>> how/whether you use a community resource. We are all here for
>> the same reason -- Opus -- and silly divisions and arguments
>> aren't in anyone's interests.
>>
>> In terms of whether the Yahoo Group should stay around, it's
>> ultimately up to Wayne since it's his group. I've been happy
>> with the web forum for a long time now but have remained
>> subscribed to the Yahoo Group in case anyone needs help. It
>> was my hope that everyone could move to the Resource Centre
>> by reaching a compromise with M2F or whatever (which I think
>> works quite well, and I read the forums as much via email now
>> as I do via the web) but my impression is that some people
>> are still not convinced (but are equally out of ideas). As
>> I've said a few times, I would much rather all of the English
>> discussion about Opus was in one place and I'd hate for new
>> users to discover the Yahoo Group without realising the
>> Resource Centre also exists. There's far more activity and
>> more of a community at the Resource Centre while the Yahoo
>> Group has been very quiet for some time now, aside from the
>> occasional on-topic post and the more frequent meta-thread
>> about either spam or how much web forums suck. I want new
>> Opus users to think "wow, that looks like a product with a
>> great, enthusiastic and helpful community who will assist me
>> and share ideas with me" and I don't think anyone would get
>> that impression from the Yahoo Group of today. Threads like
>> this obviously make it look worse, but things haven't looked
>> inviting for a while now, to be blunt (I'm 1/3rd Australian
>> myself :)). It just feels like the group stays around for a
>> few people who prefer email over the web (fair enough) but
>> hardly ever say anything. I don't really see the point,
>> especially when M2F works pretty well now and when the people
>> who are actively discussing Opus aren't going to move over
>> here no matter how much more convenient it would be for you
>> to read their posts.
>>
>> It would be great if we all got back to talking about Opus,
>> rather than discussions about how and where we discuss Opus.
>> :( I'd rather not talk about this subject any more as I just
>> spent several hours writing and re-writing this reply, on top
>> of the hours I've already put into this frustrating
>> discussion. I'm happy to talk about real things, like ideas
>> people have for stuff being better, but I don't see any point
>> in further email vs web arguments that don't actually lead to
>> a constructive idea of how to please more people, nor do I
>> plan to spend any more time defending Steve when I think his
>> actions speak for themsevles, even if what he's said or how
>> he's said it has ruffled some feathers. Steve's trying to
>> help the same as anyone else and sometimes I think maybe I
>> should be more brief, quick and off the cuff like he is
>> rather than being a total bloody idiot and wasting hours of
>> my Friday night trying to be diplomatic in a huge long reply
>> like this.
>>
>> Sigh.
>>
>> I am Jack's wasted life.
>
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Wouldn't it just be easier to have M2F send to the dopus@yahoogroups.com ?
That way both parties have what they want.



Saying that I'm sort of with Leo in his reply, however not knowing either
person (Steve or Wayne (I am an Qlder/Aussie) I'm thankful for their input
and others who make this possible.



I'm just as bad as other's for weighing into the debate, as people can see
the mainstays of Steve/Wayne/Leo & Co. who do expend a large amount of
effort. If one of these guys wishes to express an opinion let them have it.
I have an idea as to the sacrifice they make to assist the greater community
at large, until others contribute as much, I think they should reserve
comment (albeit I'm being a hypocrite at the moment)



Regards



Gavin



From: DOpus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DOpus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Peter S . . .
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 4:01 PM
To: DOpus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group




Leo,

I agree with almost all that you say, except for a couple of points.
Mostly, there is enough negativity floating around. Most of my interactions
in forums of all kinds are pleasant and supportive. My experience at the
Resource Center has not been. I don't care if Steve spends all his spare
time maintaining the site and helping people with technical questions. If I
run into shutdowns, criticism and negativity in response to my input, I
don't need it. Actions speak louder than words you might say. Sorry, in
Steve's eyes, I am evidently one of "the poor dears who cannot possibly cope
without sugar- coated hand-holding." I don't need that shit. He's not
worth interacting with if that's how he sees things. As I've said, there
enough negativity floating around, I don't need to purposely subject myself
to more.

This email thing might have a shot, except that Steve is essentially shoeing
people away from it. He wants more people to sign up in order to consider
it valuable, yet he's already made up his mind that there aren't enough
people interested only after days that most of us here even heard about it.
His admitted bias and tone will likely insure that there never will be
substantial use of that feature. Self-fulfilling prophecy.

There is no argument about M2F. It's all about the attitude around it. It
works fine. There is discussion about the fine points, but no real argument
that I can see; no one is pushing for unreasonable accomodation or mods.

So now I am Jack's overactive spleen, so I will unsubscribe from this
discussion. I have unsubscribed from all M2F mailings and logged off. I
have more important things to do too.

C Ya.

> If Steve didn't care then there wouldn't be M2F on the forums
> at all. His point is simply that a lot more people use the
> web than email so that has to be the priority. (Just the
> priority. Not the only people who matter, but the group of
> people who matter the most. Ideally everyone can be made
> happy but sometimes a choice or compromise is required, and
> you've got to go with the majority in those cases.) All of
> that makes perfect sense.
>
> We're all here to help with and/or learn about Opus, not to
> talk about email vs web forums and other meta-discussions.
> Some sensible discussion of those things is fine and has
> brought about useful changes and improvements, as well as a
> better understanding between the two camps, but now it seems
> like it's not really going anywhere. Steve said he's not
> interested in further discussion of this stuff, not because
> he assumes he is right but because the argument is in a
> holding pattern, going around in circles. It's frustrating
> for all involved and there are better ways to spend time on
> the Internet.
>
> Steve has gone out of his way to make as many people as
> possible happy -- in terms of what he has done if not what he
> has said while doing it -- and the M2F feature isn't going to
> go anywhere unless some major problem is found in it since
> it's a useful feature for some people and that's a good
> thing. Look at Steve's actions (sorting out M2F for the
> people who asked for it even though it's not something he's
> going to use himself) and don't get the wrong impression from
> a few of his words (the odd blunt comment; he's an
> Australian, after all).
>
> Equally, at least some of the people who complained about the
> very idea of web forums have shown the ability to compromise
> and give things a chance, given M2F -- and in some cases the
> web forum itself -- a try and providing useful feedback which
> has led to improvements -- again implemented by Steve --
> which have benefited everyone. For example, in addition to
> M2F the forum now has a mod which tracks exactly what you
> have and haven't read, rather than just the latest thing you
> read. That removed one of the problems that some people had
> with the web interface.
>
> Some people haven't even tried it, though. Compromises and/or
> changes are needed on both sides to make the Resource Centre
> work for everyone. As far as I'm aware every reasonable
> change and compromise has been made on the administrative
> side so now it's up to the people who want to access it but
> didn't like it before to try it out and see if they can work
> with it, provide constructive feedback, and accept that it
> may not be exactly what they want, but it's better than
> staring at an empty inbox every day.
>
> If someone finds it really doesn't work for them and there
> are no changes which can be made to solve the problem then
> fair enough, that's life and there's not really anything
> anyone can do about it. However, Steve's track record shows
> that good ideas will be looked at and implemented if
> reasonably possible (i.e. they don't involve someone spending
> six months writing brand new forum software). Not everything
> is possible, though, and the needs of the vast majority (the
> web users) will obviously take priority in the case of a
> conflict. Also, bad or impossible ideas may be met with a
> blunt response but that doesn't mean Steve hates you or your
> idea, it probably just means it isn't actually a good idea,
> in the grand scheme of things, or isn't possible within the
> current system. That's life, unfortunately.
>
> Also, some things just aren't worth doing. For example, if
> you don't want to see edited posts in your inbox then it's
> trivial to set up a filter on your side to delete them. Not
> sending the edits is silly because other people may want to
> see them, and we've already tried disabling edits completely
> with negative effects. Until someone finds a mod or thinks of
> a better idea, that's just how things are, unfortunately.
>
> The support form on GPSoftware's web page is the only
> official and direct support channel:
> http://www.gpsoft.com.au/Support.html (And maybe the German
> web forums if you bought from the German distributor,
> although I'm not sure what the exact setup there is.)
> Everything else -- the Yahoo Group, the Swedish Yahoo Group,
> The Resource Centre, the IRC channel, people sending private
> emails, etc. -- is for users helping out other users, with
> GPSoft joining in unofficially as well in some cases. Steve
> isn't a part of GPSoft -- he works for the fire brigade! --
> but he looks after one of those places and is trying to keep
> everyone there happy. People can talk where they choose to
> talk and if they need direct support from GPSoft they can
> talk to them directly. If you decide to post a question about
> Opus to the forums then Steve is hardly going to get in your
> way or in the way of the community of people who will try to
> help with a reply, so I think it would be a shame for you or
> anyone else to let something Steve said something affect
> how/whether you use a community resource. We are all here for
> the same reason -- Opus -- and silly divisions and arguments
> aren't in anyone's interests.
>
> In terms of whether the Yahoo Group should stay around, it's
> ultimately up to Wayne since it's his group. I've been happy
> with the web forum for a long time now but have remained
> subscribed to the Yahoo Group in case anyone needs help. It
> was my hope that everyone could move to the Resource Centre
> by reaching a compromise with M2F or whatever (which I think
> works quite well, and I read the forums as much via email now
> as I do via the web) but my impression is that some people
> are still not convinced (but are equally out of ideas). As
> I've said a few times, I would much rather all of the English
> discussion about Opus was in one place and I'd hate for new
> users to discover the Yahoo Group without realising the
> Resource Centre also exists. There's far more activity and
> more of a community at the Resource Centre while the Yahoo
> Group has been very quiet for some time now, aside from the
> occasional on-topic post and the more frequent meta-thread
> about either spam or how much web forums suck. I want new
> Opus users to think "wow, that looks like a product with a
> great, enthusiastic and helpful community who will assist me
> and share ideas with me" and I don't think anyone would get
> that impression from the Yahoo Group of today. Threads like
> this obviously make it look worse, but things haven't looked
> inviting for a while now, to be blunt (I'm 1/3rd Australian
> myself :)). It just feels like the group stays around for a
> few people who prefer email over the web (fair enough) but
> hardly ever say anything. I don't really see the point,
> especially when M2F works pretty well now and when the people
> who are actively discussing Opus aren't going to move over
> here no matter how much more convenient it would be for you
> to read their posts.
>
> It would be great if we all got back to talking about Opus,
> rather than discussions about how and where we discuss Opus.
> :( I'd rather not talk about this subject any more as I just
> spent several hours writing and re-writing this reply, on top
> of the hours I've already put into this frustrating
> discussion. I'm happy to talk about real things, like ideas
> people have for stuff being better, but I don't see any point
> in further email vs web arguments that don't actually lead to
> a constructive idea of how to please more people, nor do I
> plan to spend any more time defending Steve when I think his
> actions speak for themsevles, even if what he's said or how
> he's said it has ruffled some feathers. Steve's trying to
> help the same as anyone else and sometimes I think maybe I
> should be more brief, quick and off the cuff like he is
> rather than being a total bloody idiot and wasting hours of
> my Friday night trying to be diplomatic in a huge long reply
> like this.
>
> Sigh.
>
> I am Jack's wasted life.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> But then, I do not understand Steve's aggressiveness.  Do you really
not
> understand that people are pissed off by his attitude?  Are we
robots? Steve
> obviously feel  that there should be only one forum, as do many of
us, but why
> then does he act as if he does not give a damn about the needs of
those of us
> who want to post via e-mail?  He is seemingly more interested in

Now I AM getting angry. Does not give a damn? For christs sake pal I
spent a LOT of time setting everything up (not to mention the ongoing
support) just so the dozen or so subscribers can get their email. As I
will say AGAIN I do not like email and what it brings to the forums. I
have never said that emailers are not welcome. What I have said, and
will continue to say is that ANY decision regarding the forums will be
taken with the largest user base in mind, the web based memembers. Is
this clear enough yet?

I cannot for the life of me see why you lot are so upset by this.

> aggravating us
> than to say that he will keep M2F.  What a lousy peace-of-shit

Actually it was on the advice of GPSoftware that I have chosen not to
guarantee ANYTHING with the resource site. Care to take that up with
them?

Steve, decision are always weighed in favor of the majority.  That is universal,
and acceptable, of course.   But you have, as you said, taken the view of the
minority into consideration by implementing M2F.  Thank you!

Having said that, you cannot, I think, be unaware that you are coming across as
rather aggressive. We from the "other" list are were not, I believe, aware of
your strong feelings about our list.

I want to mention one thing, and that is that the style and tone of the web
posts are quite different from the style and tone on the posts on the Yahoo list
(and I do not mean anything negative about "style"  or "tone").  Curt, implying
that rather sophisticated posters are communicating.  Many of us from the Yahoo
list are not too sophisticated as far as DOpus goes. We need to ease in.

May I suggest that you, Steve, welcome the potentially new members from the
Yahoo list to make the transfer as smooth as possible.

I know this sounds corny, but I heared "That's What Friends Are For" by Dionne
Warwick on the car radio this morning.  Great song.  Made an impression. Just
wanted to convey that  feeling.

Regards,

Hans L






On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:43:09 -0000
"stevebanham" <tanis@...> wrote:


> > There are many on this list who simply disagree with you. Where you
> > see limitations with the email format, we see limitations with the
> web
> > site format. It's a matter of personal preference. It's not a matter
> > of right and wrong.
>
> Like I said, I know there will be plenty of people here who disagree -
>  I'm just not interested in a discussion on it.
>
> >
> > Here's the bottom line...
> >
> > It's my intention to suspend this list if, and only if, you are
> > committed to maintaining M2F (or another suitable alternative) to
> > provide the email option for those who want to make use of that
> > format.
>
> This list is no longer the useful resource it's been in a past. It
> serves to fragment the Opus user base and of recent times the only
> msgs to be seen are spam and discussions on spam/moderating.
>
> > I have been using M2F for a couple of weeks. I have enjoyed it very
> > much. In my opinion, it has a few limitations. However, it goes a
> long
> > way toward meeting my needs.
> >
> > We also expect that we will be treated with respect. Frankly, I have
> > had enough of your rudeness (not to mention arrogance). I don't care
> > if we agree, but I do care that we treat each other with respect.
>
>  Rudeness? Arrogance? Don't be so precious! It hasn't stopped my from
> implementing M2F has it? Just because you don't like my attitude to
> email subscriptions that isnt going to change - I maintain, ANY
> decision on the resource site will remain weighted in favour of web
> participants. It's simple maths.
>
> > Steve, the decision is yours. Are you committed to providing email
> > access to the Resource Center?
>
> What decision? Keep the user base fragmented and little to no
> discussion on Opus here?
>
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Leo,

I agree with almost all that you say, except for  a couple of points.
Mostly, there is enough negativity floating around.  Most of my interactions
in forums of all kinds are pleasant and supportive.  My experience at the
Resource Center has not been.  I don't care if Steve spends all his spare
time maintaining the site and helping people with technical questions.  If I
run into shutdowns, criticism and negativity in response to my input, I
don't need it.  Actions speak louder than words you might say.  Sorry, in
Steve's eyes, I am evidently one of "the poor dears who cannot possibly cope
without sugar- coated hand-holding."  I don't need that shit.  He's not
worth interacting with if that's how he sees things.  As I've said, there
enough negativity floating around, I don't need to purposely subject myself
to more.

This email thing might have a shot, except that Steve is essentially shoeing
people away from it.  He wants more people to sign up in order to consider
it valuable, yet he's already made up his mind that there aren't enough
people interested only after days that most of us here even heard about it.
His admitted bias and tone will likely insure that there never will be
substantial use of that feature.  Self-fulfilling prophecy.

There is no argument about M2F.  It's all about the attitude around it.  It
works fine.  There is discussion about the fine points, but no real argument
that I can see; no one is pushing for unreasonable accomodation or mods.

So now I am Jack's overactive spleen, so I will unsubscribe from this
discussion.  I have unsubscribed from all M2F mailings and logged off.  I
have more important things to do too.

C Ya.




> If Steve didn't care then there wouldn't be M2F on the forums
> at all. His point is simply that a lot more people use the
> web than email so that has to be the priority. (Just the
> priority. Not the only people who matter, but the group of
> people who matter the most. Ideally everyone can be made
> happy but sometimes a choice or compromise is required, and
> you've got to go with the majority in those cases.) All of
> that makes perfect sense.
>
> We're all here to help with and/or learn about Opus, not to
> talk about email vs web forums and other meta-discussions.
> Some sensible discussion of those things is fine and has
> brought about useful changes and improvements, as well as a
> better understanding between the two camps, but now it seems
> like it's not really going anywhere. Steve said he's not
> interested in further discussion of this stuff, not because
> he assumes he is right but because the argument is in a
> holding pattern, going around in circles. It's frustrating
> for all involved and there are better ways to spend time on
> the Internet.
>
> Steve has gone out of his way to make as many people as
> possible happy -- in terms of what he has done if not what he
> has said while doing it -- and the M2F feature isn't going to
> go anywhere unless some major problem is found in it since
> it's a useful feature for some people and that's a good
> thing. Look at Steve's actions (sorting out M2F for the
> people who asked for it even though it's not something he's
> going to use himself) and don't get the wrong impression from
> a few of his words (the odd blunt comment; he's an
> Australian, after all).
>
> Equally, at least some of the people who complained about the
> very idea of web forums have shown the ability to compromise
> and give things a chance, given M2F -- and in some cases the
> web forum itself -- a try and providing useful feedback which
> has led to improvements -- again implemented by Steve --
> which have benefited everyone. For example, in addition to
> M2F the forum now has a mod which tracks exactly what you
> have and haven't read, rather than just the latest thing you
> read. That removed one of the problems that some people had
> with the web interface.
>
> Some people haven't even tried it, though. Compromises and/or
> changes are needed on both sides to make the Resource Centre
> work for everyone. As far as I'm aware every reasonable
> change and compromise has been made on the administrative
> side so now it's up to the people who want to access it but
> didn't like it before to try it out and see if they can work
> with it, provide constructive feedback, and accept that it
> may not be exactly what they want, but it's better than
> staring at an empty inbox every day.
>
> If someone finds it really doesn't work for them and there
> are no changes which can be made to solve the problem then
> fair enough, that's life and there's not really anything
> anyone can do about it. However, Steve's track record shows
> that good ideas will be looked at and implemented if
> reasonably possible (i.e. they don't involve someone spending
> six months writing brand new forum software). Not everything
> is possible, though, and the needs of the vast majority (the
> web users) will obviously take priority in the case of a
> conflict. Also, bad or impossible ideas may be met with a
> blunt response but that doesn't mean Steve hates you or your
> idea, it probably just means it isn't actually a good idea,
> in the grand scheme of things, or isn't possible within the
> current system. That's life, unfortunately.
>
> Also, some things just aren't worth doing. For example, if
> you don't want to see edited posts in your inbox then it's
> trivial to set up a filter on your side to delete them. Not
> sending the edits is silly because other people may want to
> see them, and we've already tried disabling edits completely
> with negative effects. Until someone finds a mod or thinks of
> a better idea, that's just how things are, unfortunately.
>
> The support form on GPSoftware's web page is the only
> official and direct support channel:
> http://www.gpsoft.com.au/Support.html (And maybe the German
> web forums if you bought from the German distributor,
> although I'm not sure what the exact setup there is.)
> Everything else -- the Yahoo Group, the Swedish Yahoo Group,
> The Resource Centre, the IRC channel, people sending private
> emails, etc. -- is for users helping out other users, with
> GPSoft joining in unofficially as well in some cases. Steve
> isn't a part of GPSoft -- he works for the fire brigade! --
> but he looks after one of those places and is trying to keep
> everyone there happy. People can talk where they choose to
> talk and if they need direct support from GPSoft they can
> talk to them directly. If you decide to post a question about
> Opus to the forums then Steve is hardly going to get in your
> way or in the way of the community of people who will try to
> help with a reply, so I think it would be a shame for you or
> anyone else to let something Steve said something affect
> how/whether you use a community resource. We are all here for
> the same reason -- Opus -- and silly divisions and arguments
> aren't in anyone's interests.
>
> In terms of whether the Yahoo Group should stay around, it's
> ultimately up to Wayne since it's his group. I've been happy
> with the web forum for a long time now but have remained
> subscribed to the Yahoo Group in case anyone needs help. It
> was my hope that everyone could move to the Resource Centre
> by reaching a compromise with M2F or whatever (which I think
> works quite well, and I read the forums as much via email now
> as I do via the web) but my impression is that some people
> are still not convinced (but are equally out of ideas). As
> I've said a few times, I would much rather all of the English
> discussion about Opus was in one place and I'd hate for new
> users to discover the Yahoo Group without realising the
> Resource Centre also exists. There's far more activity and
> more of a community at the Resource Centre while the Yahoo
> Group has been very quiet for some time now, aside from the
> occasional on-topic post and the more frequent meta-thread
> about either spam or how much web forums suck. I want new
> Opus users to think "wow, that looks like a product with a
> great, enthusiastic and helpful community who will assist me
> and share ideas with me" and I don't think anyone would get
> that impression from the Yahoo Group of today. Threads like
> this obviously make it look worse, but things haven't looked
> inviting for a while now, to be blunt (I'm 1/3rd Australian
> myself :)). It just feels like the group stays around for a
> few people who prefer email over the web (fair enough) but
> hardly ever say anything. I don't really see the point,
> especially when M2F works pretty well now and when the people
> who are actively discussing Opus aren't going to move over
> here no matter how much more convenient it would be for you
> to read their posts.
>
> It would be great if we all got back to talking about Opus,
> rather than discussions about how and where we discuss Opus.
> :( I'd rather not talk about this subject any more as I just
> spent several hours writing and re-writing this reply, on top
> of the hours I've already put into this frustrating
> discussion. I'm happy to talk about real things, like ideas
> people have for stuff being better, but I don't see any point
> in further email vs web arguments that don't actually lead to
> a constructive idea of how to please more people, nor do I
> plan to spend any more time defending Steve when I think his
> actions speak for themsevles, even if what he's said or how
> he's said it has ruffled some feathers. Steve's trying to
> help the same as anyone else and sometimes I think maybe I
> should be more brief, quick and off the cuff like he is
> rather than being a total bloody idiot and wasting hours of
> my Friday night trying to be diplomatic in a huge long reply
> like this.
>
> Sigh.
>
> I am Jack's wasted life.

Leo, I think you are missing the point altogether.  Of course there is a need
for Wayne to talk about the issue of what to do with his group.  Perhaps he
should have talked to Steve privately, but he chose not to, for our benefit, I
am sure.

But then, I do not understand Steve's aggressiveness.  Do you really not
understand that people are pissed off by his attitude?  Are we robots? Steve
obviously feel  that there should be only one forum, as do many of us, but why
then does he act as if he does not give a damn about the needs of those of us
who want to post via e-mail?  He is seemingly more interested in aggravating us
than to say that he will keep M2F.  What a lousy peace-of-shit attitude (excuse
my New Yorkish)!

Hans L






On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 03:14:52 -0000
"Leo Davidson" <leo@...> wrote:


> If Steve didn't care then there wouldn't be M2F on the forums at all. His
point is simply that a lot more people use the web than email so that has to be
the priority. (Just the priority. Not the only people who matter, but the group
of people who matter the most. Ideally everyone can be made happy but sometimes
a choice or compromise is required, and you've got to go with the majority in
those cases.) All of that makes perfect sense.
>
> We're all here to help with and/or learn about Opus, not to talk about email
vs web forums and other meta-discussions. Some sensible discussion of those
things is fine and has brought about useful changes and improvements, as well as
a better understanding between the two camps, but now it seems like it's not
really going anywhere. Steve said he's not interested in further discussion of
this stuff, not because he assumes he is right but because the argument is in a
holding pattern, going around in circles. It's frustrating for all involved and
there are better ways to spend time on the Internet.
>
> Steve has gone out of his way to make as many people as possible happy -- in
terms of what he has done if not what he has said while doing it -- and the M2F
feature isn't going to go anywhere unless some major problem is found in it
since it's a useful feature for some people and that's a good thing. Look at
Steve's actions (sorting out M2F for the people who asked for it even though
it's not something he's going to use himself) and don't get the wrong impression
from a few of his words (the odd blunt comment; he's an Australian, after all).
>
> Equally, at least some of the people who complained about the very idea of web
forums have shown the ability to compromise and give things a chance, given M2F
-- and in some cases the web forum itself -- a try and providing useful feedback
which has led to improvements -- again implemented by Steve -- which have
benefited everyone. For example, in addition to M2F the forum now has a mod
which tracks exactly what you have and haven't read, rather than just the latest
thing you read. That removed one of the problems that some people had with the
web interface.
>
> Some people haven't even tried it, though. Compromises and/or changes are
needed on both sides to make the Resource Centre work for everyone. As far as
I'm aware every reasonable change and compromise has been made on the
administrative side so now it's up to the people who want to access it but
didn't like it before to try it out and see if they can work with it, provide
constructive feedback, and accept that it may not be exactly what they want, but
it's better than staring at an empty inbox every day.
>
> If someone finds it really doesn't work for them and there are no changes
which can be made to solve the problem then fair enough, that's life and there's
not really anything anyone can do about it. However, Steve's track record shows
that good ideas will be looked at and implemented if reasonably possible (i.e.
they don't involve someone spending six months writing brand new forum
software). Not everything is possible, though, and the needs of the vast
majority (the web users) will obviously take priority in the case of a conflict.
Also, bad or impossible ideas may be met with a blunt response but that doesn't
mean Steve hates you or your idea, it probably just means it isn't actually a
good idea, in the grand scheme of things, or isn't possible within the current
system. That's life, unfortunately.
>
> Also, some things just aren't worth doing. For example, if you don't want to
see edited posts in your inbox then it's trivial to set up a filter on your side
to delete them. Not sending the edits is silly because other people may want to
see them, and we've already tried disabling edits completely with negative
effects. Until someone finds a mod or thinks of a better idea, that's just how
things are, unfortunately.
>
> The support form on GPSoftware's web page is the only official and direct
support channel: http://www.gpsoft.com.au/Support.html (And maybe the German web
forums if you bought from the German distributor, although I'm not sure what the
exact setup there is.) Everything else -- the Yahoo Group, the Swedish Yahoo
Group, The Resource Centre, the IRC channel, people sending private emails, etc.
-- is for users helping out other users, with GPSoft joining in unofficially as
well in some cases. Steve isn't a part of GPSoft -- he works for the fire
brigade! -- but he looks after one of those places and is trying to keep
everyone there happy. People can talk where they choose to talk and if they need
direct support from GPSoft they can talk to them directly. If you decide to post
a question about Opus to the forums then Steve is hardly going to get in your
way or in the way of the community of people who will try to help with a reply,
so I think it would be a shame for you or anyone else to let something Steve
said something affect how/whether you use a community resource. We are all here
for the same reason -- Opus -- and silly divisions and arguments aren't in
anyone's interests.
>
> In terms of whether the Yahoo Group should stay around, it's ultimately up to
Wayne since it's his group. I've been happy with the web forum for a long time
now but have remained subscribed to the Yahoo Group in case anyone needs help.
It was my hope that everyone could move to the Resource Centre by reaching a
compromise with M2F or whatever (which I think works quite well, and I read the
forums as much via email now as I do via the web) but my impression is that some
people are still not convinced (but are equally out of ideas). As I've said a
few times, I would much rather all of the English discussion about Opus was in
one place and I'd hate for new users to discover the Yahoo Group without
realising the Resource Centre also exists. There's far more activity and more of
a community at the Resource Centre while the Yahoo Group has been very quiet for
some time now, aside from the occasional on-topic post and the more frequent
meta-thread about either spam or how much web forums suck. I want new Opus users
to think "wow, that looks like a product with a great, enthusiastic and helpful
community who will assist me and share ideas with me" and I don't think anyone
would get that impression from the Yahoo Group of today. Threads like this
obviously make it look worse, but things haven't looked inviting for a while
now, to be blunt (I'm 1/3rd Australian myself :)). It just feels like the group
stays around for a few people who prefer email over the web (fair enough) but
hardly ever say anything. I don't really see the point, especially when M2F
works pretty well now and when the people who are actively discussing Opus
aren't going to move over here no matter how much more convenient it would be
for you to read their posts.
>
> It would be great if we all got back to talking about Opus, rather than
discussions about how and where we discuss Opus. :( I'd rather not talk about
this subject any more as I just spent several hours writing and re-writing this
reply, on top of the hours I've already put into this frustrating discussion.
I'm happy to talk about real things, like ideas people have for stuff being
better, but I don't see any point in further email vs web arguments that don't
actually lead to a constructive idea of how to please more people, nor do I plan
to spend any more time defending Steve when I think his actions speak for
themsevles, even if what he's said or how he's said it has ruffled some
feathers. Steve's trying to help the same as anyone else and sometimes I think
maybe I should be more brief, quick and off the cuff like he is rather than
being a total bloody idiot and wasting hours of my Friday night trying to be
diplomatic in a huge long reply like this.
>
> Sigh.
>
> I am Jack's wasted life.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter S . . ." <pstrisik@...>
> To: <DOpus@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 11:51 PM
> Subject: RE: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group
>
>
> >
> > Steve,
> >
> > The sad thing here is that I am finding an increasing bad feeling about
> > Dopus.  You may be a volunteer, but you seem to be a gateway to or
> > representative for the company.  Wayne is not the only one who perceives you
> > as cold and rude.  This is my perception as a GPSoftware customer... A
> > marginal and unimportant one.  But apparently, you don't care.  I am caring
> > less and less.
> >
> > .......Peter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> > There are many on this list who simply disagree with you. Where you
> >> > see limitations with the email format, we see limitations with the
> >> web
> >> > site format. It's a matter of personal preference. It's not
> >> a matter
> >> > of right and wrong.
> >>
> >> Like I said, I know there will be plenty of people here who
> >> disagree -  I'm just not interested in a discussion on it.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Here's the bottom line...
> >> >
> >> > It's my intention to suspend this list if, and only if, you are
> >> > committed to maintaining M2F (or another suitable alternative) to
> >> > provide the email option for those who want to make use of that
> >> > format.
> >>
> >> This list is no longer the useful resource it's been in a
> >> past. It serves to fragment the Opus user base and of recent
> >> times the only msgs to be seen are spam and discussions on
> >> spam/moderating.
> >>
> >> > I have been using M2F for a couple of weeks. I have enjoyed it very
> >> > much. In my opinion, it has a few limitations. However, it goes a
> >> long
> >> > way toward meeting my needs.
> >> >
> >> > We also expect that we will be treated with respect.
> >> Frankly, I have
> >> > had enough of your rudeness (not to mention arrogance). I
> >> don't care
> >> > if we agree, but I do care that we treat each other with respect.
> >>
> >>  Rudeness? Arrogance? Don't be so precious! It hasn't stopped
> >> my from implementing M2F has it? Just because you don't like
> >> my attitude to email subscriptions that isnt going to change
> >> - I maintain, ANY decision on the resource site will remain
> >> weighted in favour of web participants. It's simple maths.
> >>
> >> > Steve, the decision is yours. Are you committed to providing email
> >> > access to the Resource Center?
> >>
> >> What decision? Keep the user base fragmented and little to no
> >> discussion on Opus here?
> >
> >
> >
> > The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> > User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Thanks a bunch!

--
Mike



Wayne Howard wrote:
> Hello Michael,
>
> On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 10:50:31 PM, you wrote
> re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:
>
>
>> I haven't been paying attention very closely at all.
>> What is M2F?  (seriously)
>>
>
> M2F: Mail to Forum. It allows you to send and receive email to
> web-based discussion groups like the DOpus Resource Centre without
> having to go to the Resource Centre. It's about 1/10th the number of
> steps and you can do it from the privacy of your email reader! :)
>
> http://resource.dopus.com/
>
> --
> Cheers!
> Wayne Howard
> Moderator
>
>

Hello Michael,

On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 10:50:31 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

> I haven't been paying attention very closely at all.
> What is M2F?  (seriously)

M2F: Mail to Forum. It allows you to send and receive email to
web-based discussion groups like the DOpus Resource Centre without
having to go to the Resource Centre. It's about 1/10th the number of
steps and you can do it from the privacy of your email reader! :)

http://resource.dopus.com/

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

I haven't been paying attention very closely at all.
What is M2F?  (seriously)

--
Mike



Wayne Howard wrote:
> Hello Leo,
>
> On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 10:14:52 PM, you wrote
> re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:
>
> Thank you very much for your lengthy take and perspective on the state
> of affairs here (and with M2F and the Resource Centre). You have a
> knack for helping us all to see things more clearly.
>
> I and our membership are very thankful for all that you have done to
> help the users who have frequented this group over the years. I have
> learned much from you! I owe a debt of gratitude for all of the help
> you have given me as well.
>
> I have all but decided to put this group into what I will call a
> "holding pattern". I will keep the group in tact but limit it to be an
> announcement-group for those who wish to receive infrequent
> announcements about what's happening with respect to DOpus updates,
> etc..
>
> In other words, only moderators will be able to post to this group. I
> will NOT be deleting the group. If at any point the ability to use
> email goes away with Resource Centre,it's a matter of flipping the
> switch back on, and the group will be alive. For those of us who
> depend on and prefer email, it will be our "insurance policy" that
> this medium will be available for us.
>
> I will be making this change after the weekend is over. If anyone
> wants to make a comment (or has a compelling reason why I should
> proceed differently), this is your last chance.
>
> By the way, I am very grateful to those who have emailed me privately
> and have offered to help or to offer words of encouragement. I have
> considered all of your suggestions very carefully. I encourage you all
> to give M2F a try. It doesn't do everything I wished it would, but it
> gives me the bulk of what I need. I too will be happy to see all of
> the English-speaking support Forums in one location.
>
> A big thank you to all of you! I have very much enjoyed your
> participation in this group and being your moderator.
>
> God bless!
>
> --
> Cheers!
> Wayne Howard
> Moderator
>
> "Everyone is born a genius, but the process of living de-geniuses
> them" -- R. Buckminster Fuller
>
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Hello Leo,

On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 10:14:52 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

Thank you very much for your lengthy take and perspective on the state
of affairs here (and with M2F and the Resource Centre). You have a
knack for helping us all to see things more clearly.

I and our membership are very thankful for all that you have done to
help the users who have frequented this group over the years. I have
learned much from you! I owe a debt of gratitude for all of the help
you have given me as well.

I have all but decided to put this group into what I will call a
"holding pattern". I will keep the group in tact but limit it to be an
announcement-group for those who wish to receive infrequent
announcements about what's happening with respect to DOpus updates,
etc..

In other words, only moderators will be able to post to this group. I
will NOT be deleting the group. If at any point the ability to use
email goes away with Resource Centre,it's a matter of flipping the
switch back on, and the group will be alive. For those of us who
depend on and prefer email, it will be our "insurance policy" that
this medium will be available for us.

I will be making this change after the weekend is over. If anyone
wants to make a comment (or has a compelling reason why I should
proceed differently), this is your last chance.

By the way, I am very grateful to those who have emailed me privately
and have offered to help or to offer words of encouragement. I have
considered all of your suggestions very carefully. I encourage you all
to give M2F a try. It doesn't do everything I wished it would, but it
gives me the bulk of what I need. I too will be happy to see all of
the English-speaking support Forums in one location.

A big thank you to all of you! I have very much enjoyed your
participation in this group and being your moderator.

God bless!

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

"Everyone is born a genius, but the process of living de-geniuses
them" -- R. Buckminster Fuller

If Steve didn't care then there wouldn't be M2F on the forums at all. His point
is simply that a lot more people use the web than email so that has to be the
priority. (Just the priority. Not the only people who matter, but the group of
people who matter the most. Ideally everyone can be made happy but sometimes a
choice or compromise is required, and you've got to go with the majority in
those cases.) All of that makes perfect sense.

We're all here to help with and/or learn about Opus, not to talk about email vs
web forums and other meta-discussions. Some sensible discussion of those things
is fine and has brought about useful changes and improvements, as well as a
better understanding between the two camps, but now it seems like it's not
really going anywhere. Steve said he's not interested in further discussion of
this stuff, not because he assumes he is right but because the argument is in a
holding pattern, going around in circles. It's frustrating for all involved and
there are better ways to spend time on the Internet.

Steve has gone out of his way to make as many people as possible happy -- in
terms of what he has done if not what he has said while doing it -- and the M2F
feature isn't going to go anywhere unless some major problem is found in it
since it's a useful feature for some people and that's a good thing. Look at
Steve's actions (sorting out M2F for the people who asked for it even though
it's not something he's going to use himself) and don't get the wrong impression
from a few of his words (the odd blunt comment; he's an Australian, after all).

Equally, at least some of the people who complained about the very idea of web
forums have shown the ability to compromise and give things a chance, given M2F
-- and in some cases the web forum itself -- a try and providing useful feedback
which has led to improvements -- again implemented by Steve -- which have
benefited everyone. For example, in addition to M2F the forum now has a mod
which tracks exactly what you have and haven't read, rather than just the latest
thing you read. That removed one of the problems that some people had with the
web interface.

Some people haven't even tried it, though. Compromises and/or changes are needed
on both sides to make the Resource Centre work for everyone. As far as I'm aware
every reasonable change and compromise has been made on the administrative side
so now it's up to the people who want to access it but didn't like it before to
try it out and see if they can work with it, provide constructive feedback, and
accept that it may not be exactly what they want, but it's better than staring
at an empty inbox every day.

If someone finds it really doesn't work for them and there are no changes which
can be made to solve the problem then fair enough, that's life and there's not
really anything anyone can do about it. However, Steve's track record shows that
good ideas will be looked at and implemented if reasonably possible (i.e. they
don't involve someone spending six months writing brand new forum software). Not
everything is possible, though, and the needs of the vast majority (the web
users) will obviously take priority in the case of a conflict. Also, bad or
impossible ideas may be met with a blunt response but that doesn't mean Steve
hates you or your idea, it probably just means it isn't actually a good idea, in
the grand scheme of things, or isn't possible within the current system. That's
life, unfortunately.

Also, some things just aren't worth doing. For example, if you don't want to see
edited posts in your inbox then it's trivial to set up a filter on your side to
delete them. Not sending the edits is silly because other people may want to see
them, and we've already tried disabling edits completely with negative effects.
Until someone finds a mod or thinks of a better idea, that's just how things
are, unfortunately.

The support form on GPSoftware's web page is the only official and direct
support channel: http://www.gpsoft.com.au/Support.html (And maybe the German web
forums if you bought from the German distributor, although I'm not sure what the
exact setup there is.) Everything else -- the Yahoo Group, the Swedish Yahoo
Group, The Resource Centre, the IRC channel, people sending private emails, etc.
-- is for users helping out other users, with GPSoft joining in unofficially as
well in some cases. Steve isn't a part of GPSoft -- he works for the fire
brigade! -- but he looks after one of those places and is trying to keep
everyone there happy. People can talk where they choose to talk and if they need
direct support from GPSoft they can talk to them directly. If you decide to post
a question about Opus to the forums then Steve is hardly going to get in your
way or in the way of the community of people who will try to help with a reply,
so I think it would be a shame for you or anyone else to let something Steve
said something affect how/whether you use a community resource. We are all here
for the same reason -- Opus -- and silly divisions and arguments aren't in
anyone's interests.

In terms of whether the Yahoo Group should stay around, it's ultimately up to
Wayne since it's his group. I've been happy with the web forum for a long time
now but have remained subscribed to the Yahoo Group in case anyone needs help.
It was my hope that everyone could move to the Resource Centre by reaching a
compromise with M2F or whatever (which I think works quite well, and I read the
forums as much via email now as I do via the web) but my impression is that some
people are still not convinced (but are equally out of ideas). As I've said a
few times, I would much rather all of the English discussion about Opus was in
one place and I'd hate for new users to discover the Yahoo Group without
realising the Resource Centre also exists. There's far more activity and more of
a community at the Resource Centre while the Yahoo Group has been very quiet for
some time now, aside from the occasional on-topic post and the more frequent
meta-thread about either spam or how much web forums suck. I want new Opus users
to think "wow, that looks like a product with a great, enthusiastic and helpful
community who will assist me and share ideas with me" and I don't think anyone
would get that impression from the Yahoo Group of today. Threads like this
obviously make it look worse, but things haven't looked inviting for a while
now, to be blunt (I'm 1/3rd Australian myself :)). It just feels like the group
stays around for a few people who prefer email over the web (fair enough) but
hardly ever say anything. I don't really see the point, especially when M2F
works pretty well now and when the people who are actively discussing Opus
aren't going to move over here no matter how much more convenient it would be
for you to read their posts.

It would be great if we all got back to talking about Opus, rather than
discussions about how and where we discuss Opus. :( I'd rather not talk about
this subject any more as I just spent several hours writing and re-writing this
reply, on top of the hours I've already put into this frustrating discussion.
I'm happy to talk about real things, like ideas people have for stuff being
better, but I don't see any point in further email vs web arguments that don't
actually lead to a constructive idea of how to please more people, nor do I plan
to spend any more time defending Steve when I think his actions speak for
themsevles, even if what he's said or how he's said it has ruffled some
feathers. Steve's trying to help the same as anyone else and sometimes I think
maybe I should be more brief, quick and off the cuff like he is rather than
being a total bloody idiot and wasting hours of my Friday night trying to be
diplomatic in a huge long reply like this.

Sigh.

I am Jack's wasted life.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter S . . ." <pstrisik@...>
To: <DOpus@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 11:51 PM
Subject: RE: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group


>
> Steve,
>
> The sad thing here is that I am finding an increasing bad feeling about
> Dopus.  You may be a volunteer, but you seem to be a gateway to or
> representative for the company.  Wayne is not the only one who perceives you
> as cold and rude.  This is my perception as a GPSoftware customer... A
> marginal and unimportant one.  But apparently, you don't care.  I am caring
> less and less.
>
> .......Peter
>
>
>
>
>> > There are many on this list who simply disagree with you. Where you
>> > see limitations with the email format, we see limitations with the
>> web
>> > site format. It's a matter of personal preference. It's not
>> a matter
>> > of right and wrong.
>>
>> Like I said, I know there will be plenty of people here who
>> disagree -  I'm just not interested in a discussion on it.
>>
>> >
>> > Here's the bottom line...
>> >
>> > It's my intention to suspend this list if, and only if, you are
>> > committed to maintaining M2F (or another suitable alternative) to
>> > provide the email option for those who want to make use of that
>> > format.
>>
>> This list is no longer the useful resource it's been in a
>> past. It serves to fragment the Opus user base and of recent
>> times the only msgs to be seen are spam and discussions on
>> spam/moderating.
>>
>> > I have been using M2F for a couple of weeks. I have enjoyed it very
>> > much. In my opinion, it has a few limitations. However, it goes a
>> long
>> > way toward meeting my needs.
>> >
>> > We also expect that we will be treated with respect.
>> Frankly, I have
>> > had enough of your rudeness (not to mention arrogance). I
>> don't care
>> > if we agree, but I do care that we treat each other with respect.
>>
>>  Rudeness? Arrogance? Don't be so precious! It hasn't stopped
>> my from implementing M2F has it? Just because you don't like
>> my attitude to email subscriptions that isnt going to change
>> - I maintain, ANY decision on the resource site will remain
>> weighted in favour of web participants. It's simple maths.
>>
>> > Steve, the decision is yours. Are you committed to providing email
>> > access to the Resource Center?
>>
>> What decision? Keep the user base fragmented and little to no
>> discussion on Opus here?
>
>
>
> The Directory Opus for Beginners User's Group...
> To unsubscribe, send an email to: DOpus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Yahoo group website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DOpus/
> User Resource Centre: http://resource.dopus.com/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Hello stevebanham,

On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 8:25:07 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

> Time to unsubscribe from this circular argument, which is achieving
> nothing other than wasting my weekend.

Now, that I can agree with! My weekend is just starting. I indeed have
better things to do.

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

Time to unsubscribe from this circular argument, which is achieving
nothing other than wasting my weekend.

Hello stevebanham,

On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 7:31:23 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

>> Steve, I haven't liked your attitude on many occasions. You've also
>> helped me (and countless others on numerous occasions). You often
>> spout off and then turn around and come through (often at the same
>> time).
>>
>> That being said, I would like to move on...

> So having made your snide comment you'd like no more discussion on the
> subject. Nice!

I fail to see what was snide about my comment. I was merely speaking
the facts. I was also trying to give a balanced response. You have
indeed helped me on numerous occasions. For that I am grateful.
However, I could do without the rude tone.

I also think that you chase a fair number of would-be customers away
with this attitude - probably an equal number to those who are
grateful for your help.

I sincerely doubt that I'm the only one that holds the opinions that
I've expressed.

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

> Steve, I haven't liked your attitude on many occasions. You've also
> helped me (and countless others on numerous occasions). You often
> spout off and then turn around and come through (often at the same
> time).
>
> That being said, I would like to move on...

So having made your snide comment you'd like no more discussion on the
subject. Nice!

I shall refrain from replying lest my bluntness be mis-interpreted as
rude arrogance by the poor dears who cannot possibly cope without sugar-
coated hand-holding.

> I know that you can't foresee the long term, but can you at least
> promise us that, for the foreseeable future, you have no intention of
> dropping e-mail support? Of course, if comes to the point that it's
> adversely affecting the web-based users, I think we would all
> understand.

I cannot and will not make any guarantee's regarding the Resource Site.

At the moment I have no plans to change anything, but that can change
quickly to suit any needs/concerns which may arise.

Steve,

The sad thing here is that I am finding an increasing bad feeling about
Dopus.  You may be a volunteer, but you seem to be a gateway to or
representative for the company.  Wayne is not the only one who perceives you
as cold and rude.  This is my perception as a GPSoftware customer... A
marginal and unimportant one.  But apparently, you don't care.  I am caring
less and less.

.......Peter




> > There are many on this list who simply disagree with you. Where you
> > see limitations with the email format, we see limitations with the
> web
> > site format. It's a matter of personal preference. It's not
> a matter
> > of right and wrong.
>
> Like I said, I know there will be plenty of people here who
> disagree -  I'm just not interested in a discussion on it.
>
> >
> > Here's the bottom line...
> >
> > It's my intention to suspend this list if, and only if, you are
> > committed to maintaining M2F (or another suitable alternative) to
> > provide the email option for those who want to make use of that
> > format.
>
> This list is no longer the useful resource it's been in a
> past. It serves to fragment the Opus user base and of recent
> times the only msgs to be seen are spam and discussions on
> spam/moderating.
>
> > I have been using M2F for a couple of weeks. I have enjoyed it very
> > much. In my opinion, it has a few limitations. However, it goes a
> long
> > way toward meeting my needs.
> >
> > We also expect that we will be treated with respect.
> Frankly, I have
> > had enough of your rudeness (not to mention arrogance). I
> don't care
> > if we agree, but I do care that we treat each other with respect.
>
>  Rudeness? Arrogance? Don't be so precious! It hasn't stopped
> my from implementing M2F has it? Just because you don't like
> my attitude to email subscriptions that isnt going to change
> - I maintain, ANY decision on the resource site will remain
> weighted in favour of web participants. It's simple maths.
>
> > Steve, the decision is yours. Are you committed to providing email
> > access to the Resource Center?
>
> What decision? Keep the user base fragmented and little to no
> discussion on Opus here?

Hello stevebanham,

On Friday, February 2, 2007, at 5:43:09 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

> Rudeness? Arrogance? Don't be so precious! It hasn't stopped my from
> implementing M2F has it? Just because you don't like my attitude to
> email subscriptions that isnt going to change - I maintain, ANY
> decision on the resource site will remain weighted in favour of web
> participants. It's simple maths.

Steve, I haven't liked your attitude on many occasions. You've also
helped me (and countless others on numerous occasions). You often
spout off and then turn around and come through (often at the same
time).

That being said, I would like to move on...

I know that you can't foresee the long term, but can you at least
promise us that, for the foreseeable future, you have no intention of
dropping e-mail support? Of course, if comes to the point that it's
adversely affecting the web-based users, I think we would all
understand.

The Resource Center has been your baby. I think you can understand my
reluctance to let go of the Yahoo Group. I am pleased what it has
accomplished. However, I too would like too would like to see all
DOpus support in one location.

What do you say?

--
Cheers!
Wayne Howard
Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction

> There are many on this list who simply disagree with you. Where you
> see limitations with the email format, we see limitations with the
web
> site format. It's a matter of personal preference. It's not a matter
> of right and wrong.

Like I said, I know there will be plenty of people here who disagree -
  I'm just not interested in a discussion on it.

>
> Here's the bottom line...
>
> It's my intention to suspend this list if, and only if, you are
> committed to maintaining M2F (or another suitable alternative) to
> provide the email option for those who want to make use of that
> format.

This list is no longer the useful resource it's been in a past. It
serves to fragment the Opus user base and of recent times the only
msgs to be seen are spam and discussions on spam/moderating.

> I have been using M2F for a couple of weeks. I have enjoyed it very
> much. In my opinion, it has a few limitations. However, it goes a
long
> way toward meeting my needs.
>
> We also expect that we will be treated with respect. Frankly, I have
> had enough of your rudeness (not to mention arrogance). I don't care
> if we agree, but I do care that we treat each other with respect.

  Rudeness? Arrogance? Don't be so precious! It hasn't stopped my from
implementing M2F has it? Just because you don't like my attitude to
email subscriptions that isnt going to change - I maintain, ANY
decision on the resource site will remain weighted in favour of web
participants. It's simple maths.

> Steve, the decision is yours. Are you committed to providing email
> access to the Resource Center?

What decision? Keep the user base fragmented and little to no
discussion on Opus here?

Hello stevebanham,

On Thursday, February 1, 2007, at 9:00:20 PM, you wrote
re: [DOpus] Re: Important message regarding this group:

> Yes I am biased against it and will continue to be so - email has too
> many limitations for my liking ( No need to respond here I know many
> will disagree and I couldnt care less :)

> All decisions I make regarding the Resource Centre will be weighted
> towards the largest user base and that is clearly the website readers
> rather than the emailers.

> There are still some loud proponents of an email subscription system
> who, after much noise and fuss, are yet to sign up for any of the forum
> subscriptions...

There are many on this list who simply disagree with you. Where you
see limitations with the email format, we see limitations with the web
site format. It's a matter of personal preference. It's not a matter
of right and wrong.

Here's the bottom line...

It's my intention to suspend this list if, and only if, you are
committed to maintaining M2F (or another suitable alternative) to
provide the email option for those who want to make use of that
format.

I have been using M2F for a couple of weeks. I have enjoyed it very
much. In my opinion, it has a few limitations. However, it goes a long
way toward meeting my needs.

We also expect that we will be treated with respect. Frankly, I have
had enough of your rudeness (not to mention arrogance). I don't care
if we agree, but I do care that we treat each other with respect.

If anyone wants to discuss the merits of this decision, by all means.
However, I don't want it to turn into a bitch session. I am still
considering all options and welcome your input.

Steve, the decision is yours. Are you committed to providing email
access to the Resource Center?

--
Peace,
Wayne Howard, Moderator

Using The Bat! version: 3.85.03
Directory Opus 8: "The Explorer replacement and File Management solution for
Windows"
See the tutorial: "Getting to know Directory Opus":
www.pretentiousname.com/opus/index.html#introduction