An olive branch to Mr Zale
MikeTrader
As a registered user, I have tried unsuccessfully to purchase PB9 and
post on the PB forum for nearly a year now. I have filed complaints
with BBB and the Division of consumer services in Florida. Both tell
me that they are unable to force you to sell me the product that is
clearly advertised on your website and in emails to customers.
In your response to these agencies you have accused me of many things
that I am getting ready to address. Before I do, I want to try
extending an olive branch, because we probably all have better things
to do than fight over something that you and I clearly both agree
about anyway. I want to buy PB9 and you are in business to sell it.
I have spent 10 years working with PB compilers and was your greatest
fan, until you banned me in 2006 and then again in 2008. While the
product is good in many respects, there are some things that are
different about it that developers like me need to be aware of.
I have posted about these things in a professional manner, and
contributed a lot of code and solutions to problems. I have never
flamed anyone or written anything but truth as I understood it. I
mostly just ask questions.
I am willing to state here, that I agree to be polite and professional
in all my posts on your forum.
So I am asking you to join me, "bury the hatchet" and "play nice".
Un-ban me from the PB forum and sell me PB9 upgrade, and we'll both
get back to what we enjoy doing. Fair enough?
Mike Trader
Bob Zale
Mike Trader has never purchased a PowerBASIC product. That's because
Mike Trader doesn't exist. The name "Mike Trader" is a false
identity. That is the crux of our problem. The PowerBASIC Forums at
www.powerbasic.com is a great place for programmers, with over 330,000
messages about PowerBASIC programming. It's a wonderful resource, but
there are a few rules that all participants must follow. The most
important one is that all who post must use their real name. Over the
years, we have found that folks who are identified truthfully are much
less likely to become abusive. This helps everyone, so the rule is
applied equally and uniformly to all.
"Mike Trader" was asked to use his real name just like everyone else.
He refused and became incensed. He retaliated by posting many mean
things about PowerBASIC Inc., and its employees, in other areas of the
Internet. Most of the fabrications were bizarre and readily seen as
false, but I'm sure that many folks were misled by these attacks.
That's very unfortunate, and the reason we have chosen to avoid doing
further business with the real person behind the false identity. We
are not obligated by law to do business with a person who attacks us
in this fashion, and that is our decision at this time. Since the
inception of PowerBASIC Inc. in 1993, we have only made this difficult
decision three (3) times. We are willing to reconsider it at the
appropriate time.
"Mike Trader" says he has tried to post on the PowerBASIC Forums for
nearly a year without success. This is a fabrication. It isn't
true. In the past, he was temporarily suspended (a matter of days) to
allow him time to cool off, but he was never "banned". Not then, and
not now. For the past 1.6 years, the "Mike Trader" account has been
available to him every single day. Contrary to his statement above,
his last attempt to post was on January 30, 2008, and that post
remains public, along with his others. It is true that only a few
more posts will be allowed under this account, but that is offered to
allow him to close issues with his friends gracefully. He has been
repeatedly advised that he is encouraged to create a new account under
his real name. Just like everyone else.
Earlier this year, we attempted to resolve his issues with the help of
the Better Business Bureau of Southwest Florida. John Zajac, their
corporate attorney, was asked to mediate. John presented our offer
which we both thought was very fair. "Retract your mis-statements in
the venues they were presented" and promise to not repeat. In return,
PowerBASIC will offer all possible support for a friendly and
beneficial relationship. The reply wasn't pleasant. Mr. Zajac's
final email included these summary lines:
"Should you have a change in your heart and act like a reasonable
business person, PowerBasic will welcome you back with open arms and
choose to engage in a business relationship with you. BBB will be
closing your complaint at this time. Thank you for this opportunity
to serve you. John Zajac | Corporate Counsel"
Michael, our offer remains open, just as Mr. Zajac presented it. You
are, of course, free to accept or reject it. The ball is in your
court.
I see no reason to continue this discussion here.
Best regards,
Bob Zale, President
PowerBASIC Inc.
Basic Guy
> As a registered user, I have tried unsuccessfully to purchase PB9
> and post on the PB forum for nearly a year now.
> Un-ban me from the PB forum and sell me PB9 upgrade
What kind of moron can't get a friend or relative or even an employer to
place a proxy-order for him?
You can't figure out a way to buy something over the internet and make
the order appear to come from someone else?
MikeTrader
think? I suppose you could refer to an internet handle as a "false
identity" but I suspect even you have used one. Regardless, I think
it's safe to say that the majority of prudent internet users opt to
protect their identity this way.
In this case I use a handle to protect my work. I have invested 10
years of hard work learning and developing ideas in code for a wide
range of products and services. It makes no sense to expose all of
that to a competitor or prospective clinnt by using my real name.
That's not just be poor business security, it's plain wreckless. I
have contributed to hundreds of threads (and forum discussions) on the
powerbasic Forum, done thousands of hours of work, and contributed
solutions to problems (complete with compilable code), and you want me
to put it all one click away from anyone doing a google search? I
don't think so.
>Over the years, we have found that folks who are identified truthfully are much less likely to become abusive.
As you have proved time and time again, you ban people and delete
posts to solve this "problem", in addition you do an internet check on
anyone registering for the site. It seems highly unlikely that "abuse"
will be an issue in the PB forum. What is likly, is that the Zale
definition of "abusive" is stretched to encompass anyone that might
inadvertantly irritate you. I have never made personal attacks like;
"What kind of moron can't..." and have always gone out of my to ask
polite but penetrating questions.
>all who post must use their real name.
You have referred to this as one of your "simple rules". At first
glance it sounds reasonable, but there are many reasons that people
cannot use their FULL REAL NAME when posting in a public forum. This
kind of "simple rule" can be devastating if the consequences are not
realized.
Take for example the "simple rule" that car dealerships have when you
test drive a car. They want a copy of your driving license. Sounds
reasonable doesn't it? When I test my first Corvette many years ago, I
didn't think twice about handing over my DL to salesman. When I left
the dealership that day, unknown to me, the photocopy of my DL was
sent to another GM dealership in Florida, and then to a gang of
identity thieves. They managed to get two credit cards in my name and
spend $40k before I got a telegram that ended my credit worth for six
months.
I had an offer on a property accepted at that time. It was a fantastic
deal. I would have doubled my money in a few years. I lost that deal
and spent the next six months writing letters and dealing with credit
reporting agencies to repair the damage.
As you can see, "simple rules" can have broad reaching consequences. I
am not about to loose a deal for a product I have worked hard for many
years on, because you are worried about my posts being "abusive". I
have proved in hundreds of posts, that I am a bone fide developer that
contributes to the community. I have many friends in the forum and am
known universally by my handle Mike Trader.
>That is the crux of our problem.
Perhaps you have forgotten our phone call on Tuesday September 16th,
2005 during which you personally granted me permission to continue
using my handle Mike Trader? That day you DEMANDED to know my full
real name, which I reluctantly gave you when I bought more product
with my Credit Card. I thought that was the end of it. I trusted you
to keep your word, which you did for almost two years, until Nov 2006
when I was banned again. It's hard to see how this can be crux of our
problem.
>For the past 1.6 years, the "Mike Trader" account has been available to him every single day.
Is this a joke? Are you suggesting that I just forgot how to post on
an internet forum? You made this claim in your response to the Florida
Dept of Consumer Services so I tried to post a couple of weeks ago. I
got as far as "...the administrator may have disabled your
account...".
>"Should you have a change in your heart and act like a reasonable business person...
Your words, not his. He was simply relaying your final statement that;
"Mr. Zale said that he has never lied to you. Additionally, you have
made forum postings in the past 24 hours that lead Mr. Zale to believe
that you are not acting in good faith with regard to resolving your
differences. Based on these actions, powerbasic will no longer work
towards resolving these issues at this time. Based on these actions,
powerbasic will no longer work towards resolving these issues at this
time. Should you have a change in your heart and act like a reasonable
business person, powerbasic will welcome you back with open arms and
choose to engage in a business relationship with you."
By the way, the forum posting:
http://community.thinbasic.com/index.php?topic=2764.msg20880#msg20880
was a result of Mr Zajac's request that I show that upgrading
customers was the "usual and customary" practice of powerbasic. It was
not intended to be inflamatory in any way, simply gather information.
>"Retract your mis-statements in the venues they were presented" and promise to not repeat.
Now this IS the crux of the matter, so let me say again, I am willing
to retract ANY mis-statements I have made in any venue if that will
resolve this and let us get back to what we would both rather be
doing. I look foreward to being welcomed back "with open arms and
choose to engage in a business relationship with you."
Please advise.
Steve Rossell
From reading your post it does not sound like you are ready to have a
cordial relantionship with PowerBASIC, but we are willing to give you
the benefit of the doubt. As Mr. Zale stated this is not the
approriate place to discuss this matter, so he will not continue any
discussion here. If you are sincere, please contact us privately.
Sincerely,
Steve Rossell
PowerBASIC Staff
Basic Guy
> As a registered user, I have tried unsuccessfully to purchase PB9
> and post on the PB forum for nearly a year now.
Why hasn't this guy explained why he hasn't tried to have someone else
buy PB9 for him, or to otherwise use a bogus or alternative identity and
suitable method of payment to obtain PB9 in such a way that circumvents
any embargo that PowerBasic may have against him?
Why hasn't he explained why he can't, or hasn't, created a bogus
identity for the purposes of posting messages on the PB forum, again to
circumvent any blocks that PowerBasic may have in place against him?
It seems he can have what he wants - to purchase PB9 and post on the PB
forums - without needing to raise the issue with PowerBasic or convince
them to change any position they may have against him.
What am I missing here?
Tom Lake
> forums - without needing to raise the issue with PowerBasic or convince
> them to change any position they may have against him.
>
> What am I missing here?
If he's running a business, that's not a good way to do it.
Fake names and subterfuge may eventually be found out and
will generate more ill will than the gains made from using them.
I certainly wouldn't want to do business with someone who hid
behind a lie. Hint, hint, "Mike Trader"
Tom Lake
Basic Guy
> > It seems he can have what he wants - to purchase PB9 and post on
> > the PB forums - without needing to raise the issue with PowerBasic
> > or convince them to change any position they may have against him.
>
By "running a business", do you mean that he might be a
programmer-for-hire? Or otherwise some sort of IT service business?
Even if he was, what is the likelyhood that any of his customers would
be reading any of the power-basic forums?
And even if they did, how could they possibly discover that someone
posting as "Joe Blow" on those forums is really "Mike Trader" ??
I really don't understand how there could be any downside for him if he
purchases a copy of PB9 or posts on the Powerbasic forums using an
alias. Certainly, if he's running a programming business, and if he
doesn't have PB9 but feels that he needs it, then that's not a good
situation.
> Fake names and subterfuge may eventually be found out and
> will generate more ill will than the gains made from using them.
Again, if he uses PowerBasic products as part of a business, the odds
that any of his clients read the PB forums has got to be close to
non-existent. And you're also assuming that he would be foolish enough
to post material on the forums to the extent that a linkage to his real
identity would become known and discussed (and hence become known to his
theoretical clients).
By posting the first post in this thread, here in this newsgroup, he has
exposed himself to more visibiliy to his theoretical clients by virtue
of the fact that a google search for "Mike Trader" might very well turn
up his post. If Mike Trader is an alias (and one that is not known to
his clients) then again there is no risk or downside to him by using it.
> I certainly wouldn't want to do business with someone who hid
> behind a lie. Hint, hint, "Mike Trader"
Why is it a lie to post messages in any internet forum using an alias?
Famous novels are written by authors using an alias. The use of an
alias, by itself, is no indication that there is any reason to be
critical of the person, the quality of his work, or his character.
Tom Lake
>> behind a lie. Hint, hint, "Mike Trader"
>
> Why is it a lie to post messages in any internet forum using an alias?
> Famous novels are written by authors using an alias. The use of an
> alias, by itself, is no indication that there is any reason to be
> critical of the person, the quality of his work, or his character.
By itself, using an alias is not. I was referring to advising a person to
use
someone else to order software. That's not the kind of person with whom
I'd do business. Ethics are uncompromising. Either you have them or you
don't. If PB doesn't want to sell the guy software, then he should move on
and use software from some other company. If there's no other software
that will work (highly doubtful with the selection available today), he
should
do whatever is necessary to get back in PB's good graces. I may be
anachronistic but that's how I feel.
Tom Lake
Auric__
The main problem is he's a whiney bitch who can't admit the possibility that
he might be wrong. And he probably broke rule #1 of any forum: DON'T ANNOY
THE OPS.
"Waaah! Waaah! PowerBASIC doesn't want to deal with my BS any more! Waaah!
Waaah! I'm gonna tell the world! Waaah! Waaah!"
--
You should write a book on better living through apathy.
Basic Guy
> > Why is it a lie to post messages in any internet forum using an
> > alias?
>
> By itself, using an alias is not. I was referring to advising a
> person to use someone else to order software. That's not the kind
> of person with whom I'd do business.
The concept of trade usually places sales, and money, above all else.
If a vendor offers a product for sale to the public, but goes so far
(and is so petty) to NOT accept a sale to known individuals (which might
even violate certain laws pertaining to restraint-of-trade), then I
can't see how you can judge those individuals on the basis that they
might try to obtain the product by other means (and not have to expend
any great effort or resort to illegalities to do so).
If you would be so critical of the purchaser to resort to using
alternative strategies to purchase the product, you should at least look
as critically at the vendor and wonder about his reasons for imposing
the embargo in the first place.
> Ethics are uncompromising. Either you have them or you don't.
There is someone who wants to purchase a product that is sold on the
open market. That person wants to put money in the hands of the vendor,
in spite of the fact that the vendor has black-listed the prospective
customer. Presumably the customer could download the product via
torrent and thumb his nose at the vendor while doing it. That doesn't
seem to be the case here.
> If PB doesn't want to sell the guy software, then he should move
> on and use software from some other company. If there's no
> other software that will work (highly doubtful with the
> selection available today), he should do whatever is necessary
> to get back in PB's good graces. I may be anachronistic but
> that's how I feel.
That the customer needs to be back in PB's "good graces" says more about
PB's ideosyncratic and tempermental nature and how it views it's
customers, and tells me that I should avoid it's products because of
it's corporate mindset.
Yes, it's a free market, and if a vendor wants to black-list specific
individuals, that's their right. But it's not an admirable or
respectible way to conduct business.
Basic Guy
> > It seems he can have what he wants - to purchase PB9 and post on
> > the PB forums - without needing to raise the issue with PowerBasic
> > or convince them to change any position they may have against him.
>
> The main problem is he's a whiney bitch who can't admit the
> possibility that he might be wrong.
That's not the main problem.
The main problem is that Mike Trader claims he can't buy PB9 and he
can't post to the PB forums.
I've suggested a solution to those problems.
If he invokes those solutions, then he will have his copy of PB9, and he
will be able to at least post some messages on the PB forums - at least
up until he posts any "whiney bitch" messages, at which point he (or his
alias) will presumably become blacklisted.
Tom Lake
> individuals, that's their right. But it's not an admirable or
> respectible way to conduct business.
On that we definitely agree!
Tom Lake
MikeTrader
You ask some good questions.
>place a proxy-order for him?
>created a bogus identity for the purposes of posting messages on the PB forum,
>I can't see how you can judge those individuals on the basis that they
>might try to obtain the product by other means
> download the product via torrent and thumb his nose at the vendor while doing it.
1. My Attorney is very clear that Business law addreses this. If you
use deceptiive or illegal means, the corporate veil can be pierced. Do
you think I am going to open myself up to litigation over a $99
product? Would you want to put your house and other assets on the line
over a software compiler?
2. If you do a check, you will see that I have posted hundreds and
hundreds of threads on the PB forum over the last 10 years. My style
of coding and questions is unmistkable. This would immediatly be
spotted and banned. Then what?
3. PB researches all new sign up's. They track IP address and city
when you register. I am told they also check for those IP spoofing
services. They are very thorough.
>get a friend or relative or even an employer to
4. I am now asking someone to use their FULL REAL NAME on an internet
forum. I don't know anyone that would willingly do that in the first
place, and even if they did, we have the same problem above.
5. Why should I be forced to use deception to obtain something that I
was promised when I bought the first product, that I am entitled to as
a registered user. I dont intend to let PB dictate a course of action
that reduces my standing in the community and makes me feel ashamed. I
have done nothing wrong.
6. My work must be legally owned by me, and I must warrent this when I
sell it to, for example, a startup company that is raising large
capital based on ownership of this intellectual property. This
happened recently. The VC wanted to see documentation for everything I
owned. It has to be in my name or it's no go. The COM functionality is
a significant change for PB and when interfacing with .NET style
functionality (a common request) it's essential.
>the odds that any of his clients read the PB forums has got to be close to non-existent.
One of my clients actually admitted to me (years later) that they had
done an exhaustive search to discover what language I was using, and
how I accomplished a particular solution. That turned out to be a big
contract, and led to many others. The ONLY thing that kept them from
discovering all those answers, and even compilable code, was the
distinction between my online handle and my real name on the contract.
> If PB doesn't want to sell the guy software, then he should move on and use software from some other company.
No one is more keenly aware of this than me, I assure you. The problem
is, I have spent 10 years developing a library of code that is used in
all my work. In addition, I have a product with 5 years of maturity,
in the market place, entirely written in PB. Do you have any idea how
much work it is to translate all that to another language? Even if I
go sideways to say Free Basic, its literally man years of work.
>he probably broke rule #1 of any forum: DON'T ANNOY THE OPS.
It seems a few people break this rule, and in a general public forum,
I would agree with you. But the PB forum is pitched as a support tool.
It was promised to me, and was one of the deciding factors in choosing
PB.
>"Waaah! Waaah! PowerBASIC doesn't want to deal with my BS any more!
Well, this affects my business deeply. Every time I need to ask a
question of my friends on the forum, I cannot. This is beyond
frustrating, and has turned an ardent fan into a determined detractor.
I am not the first. Is every one of these people just a trouble maker,
hell bent on disruption and breaking rules? I don't think they
understand how PO'd people get when you do stuff like this. It's not
just bad PR, it's not smart if you don't like the repercussions. I
have bought products from hundreds of vendors, including most of the
PB add on's. I have never encountered anything like this.
>he should do whatever is necessary to get back in PB's good graces.
I sure have tried. If that were possible without resorting to this
kind of plea do you think I would be here? My last email to support 6
months ago, went unanswered. I am banned on the forum, and even if I
wasn't, the last time I tried to raise an issue like this in the PB
forum, I was banned and the thread was deleted.
The thread I started in another related PB site was closed by the
administrator who, understandably, does not want to get in the middle
of something like this. BBB and consumer sgencies tell me there is
nothing they can do if even if laws are being broken. They just
reccommend litigation. That's a $10k retainer and 3 years of lawyers
fees, legal mumbo jumbo and court appearances to acheive what? The
right to buy a $99 compiler and post in a forum? That's just not an
effective use of resources. I would be better off spending that money
to get the code converted.
> Yes, it's a free market, and if a vendor wants to black-list specific individuals, that's their right.
Even though this is probably breaking a dozen advertizing and/or
discrimination laws, practically speaking, that appears to be the
case.
I have sent another email to PB. Lets hope this can be resolved
amicably.
H-Man
> You ask some good questions.
>
>>place a proxy-order for him?
>>created a bogus identity for the purposes of posting messages on the PB forum,
>>I can't see how you can judge those individuals on the basis that they
>>might try to obtain the product by other means
>> download the product via torrent and thumb his nose at the vendor while doing it.
> 1. My Attorney is very clear that Business law addreses this. If you
//SNIPPED
Mike,
I sympathize with your position here. I can also see PowerBasic's position
as to this point they have rules in place for all people equally.
Apparently they chose not to enforce the rules in your case until recently,
but the rules seem to apply to everyone equally. That said, I think they
are stupid rules, but I don't own PowerBasic so they don't apply to me.
Seems like they have the balance of power here. They have what you need and
are unwilling to give access. That means you either play by their rules, or
take your currency elsewhere. As much as that second option might pain you,
if it hurts less than option one, it would be the option to take. Seems
like PowerBasic is unwilling to bend.
Good luck Mike
BTW, I'd recommend PureBasic as an alternative, it's my compiler of choice.
--
HK
Auric__
> You ask some good questions.
>
>>place a proxy-order for him?
>>created a bogus identity for the purposes of posting messages on the PB
>>forum, I can't see how you can judge those individuals on the basis that
>>they might try to obtain the product by other means
>> download the product via torrent and thumb his nose at the vendor while
>> doing it.
> 1. My Attorney is very clear that Business law addreses this. If you
> use deceptiive or illegal means, the corporate veil can be pierced. Do
> you think I am going to open myself up to litigation over a $99
> product? Would you want to put your house and other assets on the line
> over a software compiler?
Have a friend or relative buy the software. If it's for you personally,
they can give it to you as a gift. If it's for your business, they can sell
it to the business (assuming that's not prohibited by the EULA or
something).
> 2. If you do a check, you will see that I have posted hundreds and
> hundreds of threads on the PB forum over the last 10 years. My style
> of coding and questions is unmistkable. This would immediatly be
> spotted and banned. Then what?
You could ask your questions on Usenet...
> 3. PB researches all new sign up's. They track IP address and city
> when you register. I am told they also check for those IP spoofing
> services. They are very thorough.
Are you the only PB customer in your city?
> 5. Why should I be forced to use deception to obtain something that I
> was promised when I bought the first product, that I am entitled to as
> a registered user. I dont intend to let PB dictate a course of action
> that reduces my standing in the community and makes me feel ashamed. I
> have done nothing wrong.
Unless you have that promise in writing (in other words, a contract), the
promise is meaningless. (I could promise you the moon, but unless it's in
writing, don't count on it.)
>>the odds that any of his clients read the PB forums has got to be close
>>to non-existent.
> One of my clients actually admitted to me (years later) that they had
> done an exhaustive search to discover what language I was using, and
> how I accomplished a particular solution. That turned out to be a big
> contract, and led to many others. The ONLY thing that kept them from
> discovering all those answers, and even compilable code, was the
> distinction between my online handle and my real name on the contract.
What? Why the hell would it matter to the client what compiler you use, as
long as it works as promised? For that matter, did they *ask* you what you
used? I mean, really, if any hypothetical clients (I have none right now)
were to ask me, I'd have no problem telling them "FreeBASIC for Linux,
Visual Basic 6 for Windows GUIs, PowerBASIC for everything else -- unless
you specifically request something different."
>> If PB doesn't want to sell the guy software, then he should move on and
>> use software from some other company.
> No one is more keenly aware of this than me, I assure you. The problem
> is, I have spent 10 years developing a library of code that is used in
> all my work. In addition, I have a product with 5 years of maturity,
> in the market place, entirely written in PB. Do you have any idea how
> much work it is to translate all that to another language? Even if I
> go sideways to say Free Basic, its literally man years of work.
I agree with this, but translating to an open source language *does* have
its benefits. (As I said above, I use FreeBASIC for Linux programming, but
since there's also DOS and Windows (and apparently Xbox and FreeBSD)
versions, it makes sense for me to at least *try* to port my apps. (Apps
with GUIs I don't port, exactly; I rewrite the front ends in FB to use
GTK.)
>>he probably broke rule #1 of any forum: DON'T ANNOY THE OPS.
> It seems a few people break this rule, and in a general public forum,
> I would agree with you. But the PB forum is pitched as a support tool.
> It was promised to me, and was one of the deciding factors in choosing
> PB.
I annoy the ops in pretty much every place I post that *has* ops, but you
don't see me getting booted. (Of course, the PB forums aren't one of those
places... but then again, I don't use them.)
>>"Waaah! Waaah! PowerBASIC doesn't want to deal with my BS any more!
*This* I apologize for; it was in poor taste. (I was low on caffeine when I
wrote it, and that always makes me somewhat mean.)
> The thread I started in another related PB site was closed by the
> administrator who, understandably, does not want to get in the middle
> of something like this. BBB and consumer sgencies tell me there is
> nothing they can do if even if laws are being broken. They just
> reccommend litigation. That's a $10k retainer and 3 years of lawyers
> fees, legal mumbo jumbo and court appearances to acheive what? The
> right to buy a $99 compiler and post in a forum? That's just not an
> effective use of resources. I would be better off spending that money
> to get the code converted.
If you have *PROOF* that *laws have been broken*, take your proof to the
police. Broken *laws* are a criminal matter that the police *will* deal
with -- as opposed to broken *contracts*, which are a civil matter (and
untouchable by police).
>> Yes, it's a free market, and if a vendor wants to black-list specific
>> individuals, that's their right.
> Even though this is probably breaking a dozen advertizing and/or
> discrimination laws, practically speaking, that appears to be the
> case.
You'd need to prove that they're discriminating against you illegally. They
can't black-list you because of, say, your race -- but they *can* black-
list you for talking smack about them.
> I have sent another email to PB. Lets hope this can be resolved
> amicably.
Let's see.
--
Clearly, I'm destined to burn the world.... sexy-like.
Basic Guy
> > place a proxy-order for him?
You didn't answer why that wasn't a workable solution.
If you want to buy PB9 (as you stated in your OP) then what is _really_
stopping you?
> > created a bogus identity for the purposes of posting messages on
> > the PB forum,
If your posting style is that recognizable, and if you can't alter it,
then I guess there's no help for you on that score.
> 2. If you do a check, you will see that I have posted hundreds
> and hundreds of threads on the PB forum over the last 10 years.
So what do you need the forum for?
Seems like you spent more time on the PB forum than you did doing actual
coding.
After hundreds and hundreds of posts, are you still a PB novice? Do you
still rely on the PB forums for coding help?
What's wrong with posting help questions to usenet, like you're doing
now?
> My style of coding and questions is unmistkable.
So don't post any code.
> This would immediatly be spotted and banned. Then what?
If you can't post simple, concise questions, that include only a few
lines of code (and I can't see how a few lines of code would be enough
to ID anyone) then you are your own worst enemy.
> 3. PB researches all new sign up's. They track IP address and
> city when you register. I am told they also check for those IP
> spoofing services. They are very thorough.
Then they're assholes who have too much time on their hands. I
certainly wouldn't want to participate in a forum where the operators
are so anal, especially when there are several usenet groups available.
> > get a friend or relative or even an employer to
> 4. I am now asking someone to use their FULL REAL NAME on an
> internet forum.
NO.
I said to ask a friend or relative to make the PB9 purchase for you.
Not to use their identity for posting to the PB forums. I said to
create a bogus identity for posting to the PB forums.
> 5. Why should I be forced to use deception to obtain something
> that I was promised when I bought the first product, that I am
> entitled to as a registered user.
If I was personally banned from using a web-forum, the last thing I'd be
doing would be to come crawling back on my hands and knees, pleading to
the operators to reconsider their decision.
> I dont intend to let PB dictate a course of action that
> reduces my standing in the community and makes me feel
> ashamed. I have done nothing wrong.
You have already lost that battle. If you have posted the quantity of
material that you claim, then your absence on the PB forums has already
been noticed, and perhaps even discussed. Your "standing" has already
been affected in the eyes of those that are influenced by the operators
explanations as to why you have been banned (assuming they have posted
any explanations).
> 6. My work must be legally owned by me,
Why you raised that issue - I don't know. It has nothing to do with the
issues being discussed here.
> > the odds that any of his clients read the PB forums has got to
> > be close to non-existent.
> (...) The ONLY thing that kept them from discovering all those
> answers, and even compilable code, was the distinction between
> my online handle and my real name on the contract.
As I've said, the use of an alias (on usenet, on private forums, etc) is
always the smart thing to do. There is very little to gain, and much
more to lose, by posting personally-identifiable information.
> > If PB doesn't want to sell the guy software, then he should
> > move on and use software from some other company.
> No one is more keenly aware of this than me, I assure you. The
> problem is, I have spent 10 years developing a library of code
> that is used in all my work.
That you have a lot of code is not the problem.
You stated that PB doesn't want to sell you a product that, presumably,
you don't yet own. I've stated how you can easily overcome that problem
(make the purchase through a proxy). You don't say why you can't, or
won't, do that.
> > he probably broke rule #1 of any forum: DON'T ANNOY THE OPS.
> It seems a few people break this rule, and in a general public
> forum, I would agree with you. But the PB forum is pitched as
> a support tool. It was promised to me, and was one of the
> deciding factors in choosing PB.
I've been banned a few times from MSFN.org. I come back when-ever I
need, using a new identity. I don't have any particular posting style.
I keep my questions or comments concise and to the point. I don't post
pages and pages of material, or use language or phrases that are unique
to me. And I don't post "hundreds and hundreds" of posts. You should
examine your posting frequency and probably reduce it. That is,
assuming you create an alias just to get back on those forums.
> > "Waaah! Waaah! PowerBASIC doesn't want to deal with my BS
> > any more!
> Well, this affects my business deeply. Every time I need to
> ask a question of my friends on the forum, I cannot.
If they are really your friends, then you will have their private e-mail
addresses and you can converse with them via e-mail. Or ask them if (or
why) they don't partake in these usenet forums.
> My last email to support 6 months ago, went unanswered. I am
> banned on the forum, and even if I wasn't, the last time I
> tried to raise an issue like this in the PB forum, I was
> banned and the thread was deleted.
So tell me - how do your PB-friends (and others) feel about that?
Do they speak up for you? Do they petition the operators of the PB
forum on your behalf? Do they recognize the beligerance and
control-freak mentality of the PB management and feel that the PB forums
do not deserve their patronage? Do they support you by abandoning the
PB forums and move other venues - such as right here on usenet?
Steve Rossell
amusing if it weren't so sad. The real person behind the "Mike
Trader" pseudonym could be posting on the PowerBASIC Forums today.
All he needs to do:
1- Open a PowerBASIC Forum Account under his real, full name, just
like thousands of other participants. Alternatively, we could change
the "Mike Trader" account to his real full name.
2- Use this account in good health while following the Forum Rules.
He should be particularly mindful of the rule which disallows any
disparaging remarks about anyone.
H-Man
> All this talk of lies, hiding, subterfuge, and antagonism would be
> amusing if it weren't so sad. The real person behind the "Mike
> Trader" pseudonym could be posting on the PowerBASIC Forums today.
>
> All he needs to do:
>
> 1- Open a PowerBASIC Forum Account under his real, full name, just
> like thousands of other participants. Alternatively, we could change
> the "Mike Trader" account to his real full name.
I think this is the problem. As the forum owners you certainly have the
right to dictate terms, however, the terms are IMHO unreasonable. Just an
opinion, but I've not been on a forum, web or otherwise, that absolutely
required my real identity. As your forum is publicly readable your
requirement is unreasonable. The reasons for the requirement is understood,
but, I submit that, as other forum operators seem to get along just fine
without this requirement, it seems to me you might have possibly gone too
far with this. Again, this is just my opinion.
>
> 2- Use this account in good health while following the Forum Rules.
> He should be particularly mindful of the rule which disallows any
> disparaging remarks about anyone.
The reasons for this are understood and are quite reasonable IMO.
--
HK
Auric__
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2009 06:59:09 -0700 (PDT), Steve Rossell wrote:
>
>> All this talk of lies, hiding, subterfuge, and antagonism would be
>> amusing if it weren't so sad. The real person behind the "Mike
>> Trader" pseudonym could be posting on the PowerBASIC Forums today.
>>
>> All he needs to do:
>>
>> 1- Open a PowerBASIC Forum Account under his real, full name, just
>> like thousands of other participants. Alternatively, we could change
>> the "Mike Trader" account to his real full name.
>
> I think this is the problem. As the forum owners you certainly have the
> right to dictate terms, however, the terms are IMHO unreasonable. Just
> an opinion, but I've not been on a forum, web or otherwise, that
> absolutely required my real identity. As your forum is publicly readable
> your requirement is unreasonable. The reasons for the requirement is
> understood, but, I submit that, as other forum operators seem to get
> along just fine without this requirement, it seems to me you might have
> possibly gone too far with this. Again, this is just my opinion.
Reasonable or not, PB's site = PB's rules. If *I* were to be running a forum
connected to a product of mine, I would also require the use of real names,
on the theory that if someone is using their real names, they're less likely
to act like a jackass than someone using an anonymous pseudonym. (I would
compare the kind of things I post as "Auric__" vs my real name... but I don't
*want* "Auric__" connected to my real name in any way... and I *usually* try
to be civil, even as "Auric__".)
--
Remember: opinions are worthless.
H-Man
LOL, okay, fair 'nuf.
My opinion is that this is just a part of life as a forum admin, and the
support forums I use regularly don't seem to have a lot of jackasses
posting there, but that's just one man's experience, and, I don't have to
deal with the downside there 'cause I don't run a support forum. We do
agree on this though,
" Reasonable or not, PB's site = PB's rules."
And I guess if one doesn't like it, they are free to take their business
elsewhere. Such are the freedoms we all enjoy. So, if *you* were running a
forum connected to a product *you* were selling and had these requirements,
*I* would choose to spend *my* money elsewhere.
--
HK
Auric__
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:05:00 GMT, Auric__ wrote:
>
>> Reasonable or not, PB's site = PB's rules. If *I* were to be running a
>> forum connected to a product of mine, I would also require the use of
>> real names, on the theory that if someone is using their real names,
>> they're less likely to act like a jackass than someone using an
>> anonymous pseudonym. (I would compare the kind of things I post as
>> "Auric__" vs my real name... but I don't *want* "Auric__" connected to
>> my real name in any way... and I *usually* try to be civil, even as
>> "Auric__".)
>
> LOL, okay, fair 'nuf.
> My opinion is that this is just a part of life as a forum admin, and the
> support forums I use regularly don't seem to have a lot of jackasses
> posting there, but that's just one man's experience, and, I don't have
> to deal with the downside there 'cause I don't run a support forum. We
> do agree on this though,
You'd be surprised. A lot of forums where there *seem* to be no jackass
posts (or very few, anyway) actually have highly-active moderators who
remove the jackass posts.
(People seem to think that private forums (like the PB forums) should get
the same treatment as public forums (such as Usenet), and it just ain't so.
Yes, people have the right to badmouth PB's products if they want to, but
PB doesn't have to keep those comments *on their own servers* if they don't
want to.)
> " Reasonable or not, PB's site = PB's rules."
>
> And I guess if one doesn't like it, they are free to take their business
> elsewhere. Such are the freedoms we all enjoy. So, if *you* were running
> a forum connected to a product *you* were selling and had these
> requirements, *I* would choose to spend *my* money elsewhere.
...which is, of course, your right... but since *I* don't have anything
commercially available (my stuff has all been GPL'd freeware for several
years) and I don't run *any* forums, it's a moot point. (The last time I
was paid to write something was for a small local company several years
ago, and it was strictly a one-time-only sort of thing.)
--
Hindsight is an exact science.
MikeTrader
here.
>1- Stop posting lies and slander. Retract those already in place.
No Problem. You to identify the lies, and I'll retract them.
>2- Open a PowerBASIC Forum Account under your real, full name.
I think we already covered this in great detail. To summarize, Mr Zale
personally gave me his word on the phone that I could continue using
my handle in 2005 (which I did for another 18mo). If you want to have
any credibility in the community, I suggest you honor this agreement.
3- Use this account in good health while following the Forum Rules.
Be particularly mindful of the rule which disallows any disparaging
remarks about anyone.
Covered this also. I have never used the forum to attack other
members.
> All this talk of lies, hiding, subterfuge, and antagonism would be amusing if it weren't so sad.
That's an odd statement. Do recall what you wrote to BBB and Fl
Consumer Services:
"xxxxxx is not banned from using our forums. Even
further, the false identity "Mike Trader" is not banned from using
our forums, but we reserve the right to do so if he continues to
break our simple rules."
So who's lying?
I am begging to think that you are not interested in "burying the
hatchet". Perhaps you enjoy "shredding" customers that annoy you?
Steve Rossell
accepted it.
Today, you asked my advice privately and I offered it to you.
As Mr. Zale said, "The ball is in your court". You may accept or
reject as you choose. We will engage in no bickering with you.
MikeTrader
OK?
Auric__
> Since you added a condition in your email, I guess I should cover it
> here.
Uh... in the future, could you at least try to make it not look like you're
replying to *me*? I'm not a PB employee.
--
That's a lot of work to fabricate that huge of an evil plot.
Basic Guy
> (People seem to think that private forums (like the PB forums)
> should get the same treatment as public forums (such as Usenet),
> and it just ain't so.
You are diverting the argument about PB's requirement to signup and use
your real name for their forums by restating the issue in terms of
private / public forum operation or ownership.
That any entity can establish a web-forum and run it any way they want
is not the issue. Of course they can. They can establish as many rules
as they want, and enforce them any way they want.
But it is certainly within anyone and everyone's right to engage in a
discussion with others or post their thoughts about those rules in any
venue that they care to. Some of those venues will be open and free (ie
- usenet) and some will be extremely hostile to those posts (ie - the
PowerBasic forums).
If the rules are few, or rational / reasonable, or applied in an
unbiased way, then any such discussion of them will theoretically be
short and infrequent.
If the rules are many, or irrational / unreasonable, or applied in a
biased way, then the discussion will be useful and perhaps even
productive.
A rule prohibiting the use of an alias or handle when registering with
and posting to a web-forum is unreasonable and unnecessary and serves no
useful purpose and has many disadvantages for the participants.
You can continue to believe otherwise, but all it would prove is that
you are a PowerBasic apologist or sycophant.
Auric__
> Auric__ wrote:
>
>> (People seem to think that private forums (like the PB forums)
>> should get the same treatment as public forums (such as Usenet),
>> and it just ain't so.
>
> You are diverting the argument about PB's requirement to signup and use
> your real name for their forums by restating the issue in terms of
> private / public forum operation or ownership.
Sorry, that wasn't my intention at all. Just meant it to be an observation.
That paragraph from my post is only tangentally related to this thread.
> That any entity can establish a web-forum and run it any way they want
> is not the issue.
Okay.
> Of course they can. They can establish as many rules
> as they want, and enforce them any way they want.
>
> But it is certainly within anyone and everyone's right to engage in a
> discussion with others or post their thoughts about those rules in any
> venue that they care to. Some of those venues will be open and free (ie
> - usenet) and some will be extremely hostile to those posts (ie - the
> PowerBasic forums).
>
> If the rules are few, or rational / reasonable, or applied in an
> unbiased way, then any such discussion of them will theoretically be
> short and infrequent.
Such a discussion would probably be unnecessary.
> If the rules are many, or irrational / unreasonable, or applied in a
> biased way, then the discussion will be useful and perhaps even
> productive.
>
> A rule prohibiting the use of an alias or handle when registering with
> and posting to a web-forum is unreasonable and unnecessary and serves no
> useful purpose and has many disadvantages for the participants.
In my immediately previous post, I stated one possible reason for that
(which is the reason *I* would do the same thing): "I would also require
the use of real names, on the theory that if someone is using their real
names, they're less likely to act like a jackass than someone using an
anonymous pseudonym." (Of course, you may notice that *my* real name is not
provided anywhere on Usenet.)
As I believe I already said, it's your choice whether or not to use the
forums. (I don't, for reasons which have nothing to do with the topics
covered in this thread... but then, I rarely need support at all. Last year
I put it this way: "I am probably their ideal customer: I send them money,
they send me their products, no support requested, the end.")
> You can continue to believe otherwise, but all it would prove is that
> you are a PowerBasic apologist or sycophant.
[shrug] Believe what you wish. I like their products; I couldn't care less
how they act toward others. (I've said something like *that*, before, too.)
...For that matter, I don't care how they act toward *me* as long as they
still sell me their products. (They've always been courteous to me, but
then, that's just me.)
--
That was surprisingly satisfying.
Basic Guy
> > A rule prohibiting the use of an alias or handle when registering
> > with and posting to a web-forum is unreasonable and unnecessary
> > and serves no useful purpose and has many disadvantages for the
> > participants.
>
> In my immediately previous post, I stated one possible reason for
> that (which is the reason *I* would do the same thing): "I would
> also require the use of real names, on the theory that if someone
> is using their real names, they're less likely to act like a
> jackass than someone using an anonymous pseudonym."
The flaw here is that there is no practical way to determine during
forum registration that the name being supplied by the applicant is the
applicant's real, authentic name.
So your theory that the use of real names would limit forum vandalism
really doesn't work. Someone wishing to post disruptive content would
presumably register with a fake (but authentic-looking) name.
> As I believe I already said, it's your choice whether or not to
> use the forums.
That, again, is a diversion. It's a given that someone, anyone, can
choose the forums they want to participate in.
> ...For that matter, I don't care how they act toward *me* as
> long as they still sell me their products. (They've always been
> courteous to me, but then, that's just me.)
You couldn't care less how they act towards you. Could that be because
they've always been courteous to you?
What if you had a real support issue, but they ignored your support
e-mails, and deleted your PB support forum posts? Would you still "care
less" about how they act towards you?
Auric__
> Auric__ wrote:
>
>> > A rule prohibiting the use of an alias or handle when registering
>> > with and posting to a web-forum is unreasonable and unnecessary
>> > and serves no useful purpose and has many disadvantages for the
>> > participants.
>>
>> In my immediately previous post, I stated one possible reason for
>> that (which is the reason *I* would do the same thing): "I would
>> also require the use of real names, on the theory that if someone
>> is using their real names, they're less likely to act like a
>> jackass than someone using an anonymous pseudonym."
>
> The flaw here is that there is no practical way to determine during
> forum registration that the name being supplied by the applicant is the
> applicant's real, authentic name.
>
> So your theory that the use of real names would limit forum vandalism
> really doesn't work. Someone wishing to post disruptive content would
> presumably register with a fake (but authentic-looking) name.
It *should* be simple enough to extend the "create new user" script to
check the name against some sort of database of paying customers' names.
It's what I'd do.
>> As I believe I already said, it's your choice whether or not to
>> use the forums.
>
> That, again, is a diversion. It's a given that someone, anyone, can
> choose the forums they want to participate in.
Then just *don't use the forums*. It's simple.
>> ...For that matter, I don't care how they act toward *me* as
>> long as they still sell me their products. (They've always been
>> courteous to me, but then, that's just me.)
>
> You couldn't care less how they act towards you. Could that be because
> they've always been courteous to you?
Possibly, but as long as the end result of any conversation between me and
them results in "Auric__ has what he needs", they can be a bunch of dicks
for all I care. "Dear PB, please send me the latest version." "Here you go,
asshole."
> What if you had a real support issue, but they ignored your support
> e-mails, and deleted your PB support forum posts? Would you still "care
> less" about how they act towards you?
I've never had a support issue with PB, ever, so I can't really answer
that... and since my income doesn't depends on PB or their products, I
won't, for the foreseeable future.
--
I must excel in this.