Community MX - The Latest

[nospam]

I have make a comment on this. While I don't have a problem with fee based
content I do have a problem with two things here.

1) Stop with the multi-part junk. Do the entire thing and then charge a far
price for it and get on with it. This little bit here and little bit there
is for the birds. In fact I won't buy because of it.

2) To be perfectly honest most of the subjects you have covered are either
too basic, not interesting or available someplace else for free. If you want
to create content that you expect people to pay for then you need to create
content that is highly useful, fun, excitting and that pushes the designers
and programmers skills. Creating Seamless Background images at least those
you have covered just isn't thrilling.

I would also like to suggest that you go in to more detail. Some of these
articles just seem to skim the top. For example the Creating Seamless
Backgrounds would be more interesting if you talked about how to create
backgrounds that were large in size (2000 x 2000 pixels), interesting in
design, repeated and were small. I do these a lot and while they are
challenging to do they are also fun and useful.

Well, there are my comments. Do with them as you wish.

R

[Les Matthews]

Nospam,

While I have no problem with people offering constuctive criticism in this
newsgroup; I wish that those who do so, would at least use their real names.
It would lend more credence to your convictions.

Les


"nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:bfk527$323$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> I have make a comment on this. While I don't have a problem with fee based
> content I do have a problem with two things here.
>
> 1) Stop with the multi-part junk. Do the entire thing and then charge a

far

> price for it and get on with it. This little bit here and little bit there
> is for the birds. In fact I won't buy because of it.
>
> 2) To be perfectly honest most of the subjects you have covered are either
> too basic, not interesting or available someplace else for free. If you

want

> to create content that you expect people to pay for then you need to

create

> content that is highly useful, fun, excitting and that pushes the

designers

> and programmers skills. Creating Seamless Background images at least those
> you have covered just isn't thrilling.
>
> I would also like to suggest that you go in to more detail. Some of these
> articles just seem to skim the top. For example the Creating Seamless
> Backgrounds would be more interesting if you talked about how to create
> backgrounds that were large in size (2000 x 2000 pixels), interesting in
> design, repeated and were small. I do these a lot and while they are
> challenging to do they are also fun and useful.
>
> Well, there are my comments. Do with them as you wish.
>
> R
>
>

[Dan Vendel *GOF*]

Les Matthews wrote:

> It would lend more credence to your convictions.

Why?

--
Dan Vendel - *GOF*
[url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
Contact me directly by clicking here:
[url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
Formmail tutorial:
[url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
Nested table demonstration:
[url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]

[Les Matthews]

I sometimes have difficulty determining the veracity of critical posts by
'anonymous' users. But maybe, that's just me.

"Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_@_the_bottom_of_the_post.com> wrote in
message news:bfk5v6$2mr$2@forums.macromedia.com...

> Les Matthews wrote:
>

> > It would lend more credence to your convictions.

>
> Why?
>
> --
> Dan Vendel - *GOF*
> [url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
> Contact me directly by clicking here:
> [url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
> Formmail tutorial:
> [url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
> Nested table demonstration:
> [url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]
>

[E. T. Culling]

Preview 2 Ext. - a very nice new feature ... and definately worth the
price.... thank you!
Eleanor

"Bill .:CMX:." <billhorvath@nospamjavafueled.com> wrote in message
news:bfji5l$nql$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Here's the Latest Content from Your Friends at Community MX
>
>
> Image Preview 2 Extension (Preview images right from the site panel)
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A20832FA1D1A4BDD[/url]
>
> The CMX Dash Pack [Free]
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A77C19B892610EBF[/url]
>
> Creating a Batch Process for Adjusting the Brightness of an Image
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A3D5ED747BEBB562[/url]
>
> A Simple Game with Drag and Drop Interactions
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=ACCE1DA73E6F43C1[/url]
>
> Using Guides to Help Slice an Image
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AA4BF46FF1DA26F6[/url]
>
> Fun with the DataGrid Tag, Part I
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AC61813B8941BDC4[/url]
>
> Contribute to Macromedia's New Product Activation Initiative [Free]
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A61E9FD4034F3AC3[/url]
>
> Debugging CSS, the Easy Way [Free]
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A33F8E6B1608B4E6[/url]
>
> Creating Seamless Background Images
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A78F21E8386F00B8[/url]
>
> Float: The Bugs, Part I
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AF85B1B881347F29[/url]
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Horvath
>
> Extending Knowledge, Daily
> [url]http://www.communityMX.com/[/url]
> CommunityMX - Free Resources:
> [url]http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm[/url]
> No registration req'd for free content
> ---
>
>
>

[danilocelic]

Les Matthews wrote:

> More convenient than using the Assets panel?

Once you have found the image in the Site panel, which is where I spot
images I have questions about, you'd have to then switch to the Assets
panel.

Then on to clicking the Images category button, which I seem never to
have left the Assets panel set to that last time I was there.

Then find the image again, if I rememered its file name.

Then if it's a larger image, you likely have to make the preview area
larger to get a good idea of what the image is (at least I always seem
to be doing that).

So for me, the extension is a much more convenient two click operation,
rather than a potential 4-6 step operation that. Unfortunately, DW
doesn't have a "Select in Assets panel" option off the Site panel.

--
Enjoy,
Danilo Celic

| Extending Knowledge, Daily
| [url]http://www.CommunityMX.com/[/url]

[Al Sparber- PVII]

The assets panel also takes a lot of juice to initialize. I never use it. I
think this is a very convenient extension. Even I might use it :-)

--
Al Sparber - PVII
[url]http://www.projectseven.com[/url]
Dreamweaver Extensions - DesignPacks - Tutorials - Books
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The PVII Newsgroup | [url]news://forums.projectseven.com/pviiwebdev[/url]
The CSS Newsgroup | [url]news://forums.projectseven.com/css[/url]
---------------------------------------------------------------------



"danilocelic" <danilo@shimmerphase.com> wrote in message
news:bfkdfn$hg2$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Les Matthews wrote:
>

> > More convenient than using the Assets panel?

>
> Once you have found the image in the Site panel, which is where I spot
> images I have questions about, you'd have to then switch to the Assets
> panel.
>
> Then on to clicking the Images category button, which I seem never to
> have left the Assets panel set to that last time I was there.
>
> Then find the image again, if I rememered its file name.
>
> Then if it's a larger image, you likely have to make the preview area
> larger to get a good idea of what the image is (at least I always seem
> to be doing that).
>
> So for me, the extension is a much more convenient two click operation,
> rather than a potential 4-6 step operation that. Unfortunately, DW
> doesn't have a "Select in Assets panel" option off the Site panel.
>
> --
> Enjoy,
> Danilo Celic
>
> | Extending Knowledge, Daily
> | [url]http://www.CommunityMX.com/[/url]
>

[Les Matthews]

"Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_@_the_bottom_of_the_post.com> wrote in
message news:bfkcp8$2mr$7@forums.macromedia.com...

> Les Matthews wrote:
>

> > It's easier to rant when anonymous.

>
> But it wasn't a rant, was it?

No, it wasn't. My comment was meant to point out a small pet peave of mine -
not something extremely important. It certainly wasn't meant to disparage
nospam, as I have no reason to question his/her credibility. I believe my
original comment was of less offense, however, than was nospam's (I did not
use terms like "multi-part junk" or "not interesting" in front of nospam's
entire target market for his product).

>
> It's the same reason the legal and law

> > enforcement professions attach less wieght to 'anonymous' tips than to

those

> > from informants who provide their names.

>
> No, wrong and a terrible generalization.

Yes, that statement is correct. Ask someone within either of those
professions (you can add journalism to the list of professions in which an
anonymous tip is attributed less credence than one that can be sourced). The
point is broader though - that is, that it is human nature to attach more
credibility to an identifiable source than an anonymous one.

>

> >
> > If I had some displeasure with the product of someone in the DMX

community,

> > I would likely address through channels other than this forum. If I were
> > masquerading as 'GorillaMan', however, I might feel less inhibited to
> > observe accepted mores and might in fact publicly criticize the product

in

> > front of its entire target market. GorillaMan would probably also be

more

> > likely to overstate the case than would Les.
> >
> > If I were to read two completely divergent viewpoints - one from an
> > anonymous poster and the other from a poster with a real name. In the
> > absence of additional information, my inclination would be to more

readily

> > accept the viewpoint of the poster who provided his name. Maybe this
> > inclination is not shared with others, but I think it is.

>
> If you read a balanced post, clearly showing that the one who wrote it
> knows what he/she is talking about, why is it important that it says
> "Quing Huong, Ulan Batar" in the signature instead of "Donald Duck"? You
> still don't know if this Quing Huong is "a real name", and the points
> made are the same, right?
>

True. While I am not questioning nospam's knowledge, the post to which I
replied was one of opinion (i.e. "not interesting", "too basic"...) - not
necessarily established fact. As I said earlier, a person is more likely to
overstate things when posting anonymously.

> Restaurant scene:
> "Hey, waiter! This steak tastes like fish!"
> "Do you have an ID?"
> "No?"
> "Then the steak is fine!"
> "Huh? Hang on.....will my passport do?"
> "Yes, passport is OK and I will immediatelly get you a new steak, sir"
> ;-)
>

The person in this example is far from anonymous. This person is actually in
your presence. This is the "terrible generalization". Now if you had instead
said that the diner spray-painted "The steak tastes like fish!" on a highway
overpass, that would have been a good analogy.

> Les, I'm not after you or anything, just curious about this phenomenon
> and have a few minutes to spare. No need replying...
>

No offense taken. We are just agreeing to disagree.

> Cheers!

Same to 'ya!

>
> Dan (maybe)
>

GorillaMan

[Les Matthews]

Thanks

"danilocelic" <danilo@shimmerphase.com> wrote in message
news:bfkdfn$hg2$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Les Matthews wrote:
>

> > More convenient than using the Assets panel?

>
> Once you have found the image in the Site panel, which is where I spot
> images I have questions about, you'd have to then switch to the Assets
> panel.
>
> Then on to clicking the Images category button, which I seem never to
> have left the Assets panel set to that last time I was there.
>
> Then find the image again, if I rememered its file name.
>
> Then if it's a larger image, you likely have to make the preview area
> larger to get a good idea of what the image is (at least I always seem
> to be doing that).
>
> So for me, the extension is a much more convenient two click operation,
> rather than a potential 4-6 step operation that. Unfortunately, DW
> doesn't have a "Select in Assets panel" option off the Site panel.
>
> --
> Enjoy,
> Danilo Celic
>
> | Extending Knowledge, Daily
> | [url]http://www.CommunityMX.com/[/url]
>

[nospam]

Les,

Fair comment. My name is Robert Barnett. [email]rb@galaxyflyer.com[/email].

R


"Les Matthews" <LesAMatthews@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bfk5lp$43a$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Nospam,
>
> While I have no problem with people offering constuctive criticism in this
> newsgroup; I wish that those who do so, would at least use their real

names.

> It would lend more credence to your convictions.
>
> Les
>
>
> "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:bfk527$323$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > I have make a comment on this. While I don't have a problem with fee

based

> > content I do have a problem with two things here.
> >
> > 1) Stop with the multi-part junk. Do the entire thing and then charge a

> far

> > price for it and get on with it. This little bit here and little bit

there

> > is for the birds. In fact I won't buy because of it.
> >
> > 2) To be perfectly honest most of the subjects you have covered are

either

> > too basic, not interesting or available someplace else for free. If you

> want

> > to create content that you expect people to pay for then you need to

> create

> > content that is highly useful, fun, excitting and that pushes the

> designers

> > and programmers skills. Creating Seamless Background images at least

those

> > you have covered just isn't thrilling.
> >
> > I would also like to suggest that you go in to more detail. Some of

these

> > articles just seem to skim the top. For example the Creating Seamless
> > Backgrounds would be more interesting if you talked about how to create
> > backgrounds that were large in size (2000 x 2000 pixels), interesting in
> > design, repeated and were small. I do these a lot and while they are
> > challenging to do they are also fun and useful.
> >
> > Well, there are my comments. Do with them as you wish.
> >
> > R
> >
> >

>
>

[nospam]

Well, I stand behind what I said and I didn't mean it as a put down. As I
said I have no problem paying for content, but I find the articles you have
offered to be less than...thrilling and I hate the multi-part thing.

Sincerely,

Robert Barnett
[email]rb@galaxyflyer.com[/email]


"Les Matthews" <LesAMatthews@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bfka47$c5k$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> It's easier to rant when anonymous. It's the same reason the legal and law
> enforcement professions attach less wieght to 'anonymous' tips than to

those

> from informants who provide their names.
>
> If I had some displeasure with the product of someone in the DMX

community,

> I would likely address through channels other than this forum. If I were
> masquerading as 'GorillaMan', however, I might feel less inhibited to
> observe accepted mores and might in fact publicly criticize the product in
> front of its entire target market. GorillaMan would probably also be more
> likely to overstate the case than would Les.
>
> If I were to read two completely divergent viewpoints - one from an
> anonymous poster and the other from a poster with a real name. In the
> absence of additional information, my inclination would be to more readily
> accept the viewpoint of the poster who provided his name. Maybe this
> inclination is not shared with others, but I think it is.
>
> "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_@_the_bottom_of_the_post.com> wrote

in

> message news:bfk6u3$2mr$4@forums.macromedia.com...

> > Les Matthews wrote:
> >

> > > I sometimes have difficulty determining the veracity of critical posts

> by

> > > 'anonymous' users. But maybe, that's just me.

> >
> > Yeah, I understood that from your previous post, but you're not saying
> > why. I've heard this before several times, so I'm just curious.
> >
> > --
> > Dan Vendel - *GOF*
> > [url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
> > Contact me directly by clicking here:
> > [url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
> > Formmail tutorial:
> > [url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
> > Nested table demonstration:
> > [url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]
> >

>
>

[Dan Vendel *GOF*]

Les Matthews wrote:

> Yes, that statement is correct. Ask someone within either of those
> professions

Don't have to. As it happens, I've got some law studies under my belt
with quite some hands-on experience from cop's daily jobs, prosecutors
and law offices.

I think you've watched too many movies. Anonymous tips don't carry "less
weight". They can actually carry *more* weight since the tipper might be
reluctant to reveal whatever it is if he/she need to identify
him/herself. Further on, if you call 911 and tell them someone's raping
a woman in the street, they will in fact send help whether you say who
you are or not.

The reason anonymous tips are a PITA is that they can't bring in this
tipper later to verify whatever took place.


(you can add journalism to the list of professions in which an

> anonymous tip is attributed less credence than one that can be sourced).

Well, journalists and I aren't best friends, and I think their ethics
can be discussed (hold on to your chair: I've also worked for a TV
newsshow). They will attach credibility to anything that suits their agenda.

The

> point is broader though - that is, that it is human nature to attach more
> credibility to an identifiable source than an anonymous one.

I agree. But the source isn't identifiable. You don't *know* if he/she
is "Quing Huong" or "Donald Duck", so what's the difference?

>

>>>If I had some displeasure with the product of someone in the DMX

>
> community,
>

>>>I would likely address through channels other than this forum.

Why? They're promoting their stuff *here*, trying to get some $ from
people *here*. If someoe *here* isn't happy with them, why should they
not receive criticism *here*?

> The person in this example is far from anonymous. This person is actually in
> your presence.

Nah...presence or not has nothing to do with being anonymous. The word
means "without name" (from Greek).

This is the "terrible generalization". Now if you had instead

> said that the diner spray-painted "The steak tastes like fish!" on a highway
> overpass, that would have been a good analogy.

...and if there had been a signature saying "Quing Huong, Ulan Batar"
along with it, there had also been more credence? ;-)


Cheers!

--
Dan Vendel - *GOF*
[url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
Contact me directly by clicking here:
[url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
Formmail tutorial:
[url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
Nested table demonstration:
[url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]

[Bill .:CMX:.]

I agree, Eleanor. When Danilo first came up with this one, I was one happy
camper. It's not something you'll find anywhere else.

--
Bill Horvath

Extending Knowledge, Daily
[url]http://www.communityMX.com/[/url]
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
[url]http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm[/url]
No registration req'd for free content
---

"E. T. Culling" <etcetc@notatcrcwnet.com> wrote in message
news:bfk988$agm$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Preview 2 Ext. - a very nice new feature ... and definately worth the
> price.... thank you!
> Eleanor
>
> "Bill .:CMX:." <billhorvath@nospamjavafueled.com> wrote in message
> news:bfji5l$nql$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > Here's the Latest Content from Your Friends at Community MX
> >
> >
> > Image Preview 2 Extension (Preview images right from the site panel)
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A20832FA1D1A4BDD[/url]
> >
> > The CMX Dash Pack [Free]
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A77C19B892610EBF[/url]
> >
> > Creating a Batch Process for Adjusting the Brightness of an Image
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A3D5ED747BEBB562[/url]
> >
> > A Simple Game with Drag and Drop Interactions
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=ACCE1DA73E6F43C1[/url]
> >
> > Using Guides to Help Slice an Image
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AA4BF46FF1DA26F6[/url]
> >
> > Fun with the DataGrid Tag, Part I
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AC61813B8941BDC4[/url]
> >
> > Contribute to Macromedia's New Product Activation Initiative [Free]
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A61E9FD4034F3AC3[/url]
> >
> > Debugging CSS, the Easy Way [Free]
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A33F8E6B1608B4E6[/url]
> >
> > Creating Seamless Background Images
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A78F21E8386F00B8[/url]
> >
> > Float: The Bugs, Part I
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AF85B1B881347F29[/url]
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bill Horvath
> >
> > Extending Knowledge, Daily
> > [url]http://www.communityMX.com/[/url]
> > CommunityMX - Free Resources:
> > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm[/url]
> > No registration req'd for free content
> > ---
> >
> >
> >

>
>

[danilocelic]

Les Matthews wrote:

> Thanks

You're welcom Les.

--
Enjoy,
Danilo Celic
| Extending Knowledge Daily
| [url]http://www.CommunityMX.com/[/url]

[danilocelic]

Al Sparber- PVII wrote:

> The assets panel also takes a lot of juice to initialize. I never use it. I
> think this is a very convenient extension. Even I might use it :-)

I rarely use the Assets panel myself, just never gave a thought to turn
it off, will do so now, thanks for the reminder.

Glad you see the extensions usefulness. All it takes is an itch and
sometimes you just gotta scratch it. :-)

--
Enjoy,
Danilo Celic
| Extending Knowledge Daily
| [url]http://www.CommunityMX.com/[/url]

[Les Matthews]

Hey Dan,

I had to hurriedly depart last night and just now got back to this
newsgroup. I hope you understand that this is not a huge issue with me, and
this debate has gone much further than I originally intended.

That said, I am still of the opinion that sourced tips are more highly
valued than anonymous ones in the legal profession. Justice Kennedy of the
Florida Supreme Court wrote on March 28, 2000 that "An anonymous telephone
tip without more is different, however; for even if the officer's testimony
about receipt of the tip is found credible, there is a second layer of
inquiry respecting the reliability of the informant that cannot be pursued.
If the telephone call is truly anonymous, the informant has not placed his
credibility at risk and can lie with impunity. The reviewing court cannot
judge the credibility of the informant and the risk of fabrication becomes
unacceptable." (Referenced opinion found here:
[url]http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-1993.ZC.html[/url]).

I feel the part of his statement that is most relevant to this conversation
is the line, "If the telephone call is truly anonymous, the informant has
not placed his credibility at risk and can lie with impunity. The reviewing
court cannot judge the credibility of the informant and the risk of
fabrication becomes unacceptable."

But, we are really not talking about the legal profession; we are talking
about this newsgroup. You asked me why I said, "I sometimes have difficulty
determining the veracity of critical posts by 'anonymous' users". My answer
is that in the case of the expression of personal opinion, an anonymous
poster chooses not to attach his personal credibility to his statement -
and, that, in my opinion, diminishes the value of the opinion.

In reference to your question, "But the source isn't identifiable. You don't
*know* if he/she is "Quing Huong" or "Donald Duck", so what's the
difference?"; my answer is that it is not verifiable evidence that's
important here - it is perception. If I were to read identical postings from
Quing Huong and Donald Duck, I would tend to more highly value the opinion
expressed by Quing Huong. One posting 'appears' to me to be an expression of
opinion from someone named Quing Huong; the other 'appears' to be an
expression of opinion from someone who wishes to withhold his identity. I
think it is natural to attribute greater credibility to the poster who
attached his personal integrity.

In reference to the appropriateness of criticism of DW-related products in
this forum, I think it is contingent upon the nature of the promotion. The
mere announcement that something is available and inclusion of a link to
obtain more information should not open the door for public criticism. If
however, dubious assertions about the product (i.e. "the best DW content
available anywhere on the Net") are made, then retort may be appropriate. In
the absence of dubious assertions or 'hard-sell' language, the only product
it is appropriate to criticize without request for such criticism is
Dreamweaver.

And yes, signing the statement spray-painted on the overpass would make my
consideration of it more likely because I would 'perceive' the statement to
have been made by someone willing to attach his personal credibility.

Les


"Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_@_the_bottom_of_the_post.com> wrote in
message news:bfkhoi$2mr$11@forums.macromedia.com...

> Les Matthews wrote:
>

> > Yes, that statement is correct. Ask someone within either of those
> > professions

>
> Don't have to. As it happens, I've got some law studies under my belt
> with quite some hands-on experience from cop's daily jobs, prosecutors
> and law offices.
>
> I think you've watched too many movies. Anonymous tips don't carry "less
> weight". They can actually carry *more* weight since the tipper might be
> reluctant to reveal whatever it is if he/she need to identify
> him/herself. Further on, if you call 911 and tell them someone's raping
> a woman in the street, they will in fact send help whether you say who
> you are or not.
>
> The reason anonymous tips are a PITA is that they can't bring in this
> tipper later to verify whatever took place.
>
>
> (you can add journalism to the list of professions in which an

> > anonymous tip is attributed less credence than one that can be sourced).

>
> Well, journalists and I aren't best friends, and I think their ethics
> can be discussed (hold on to your chair: I've also worked for a TV
> newsshow). They will attach credibility to anything that suits their

agenda.

>
> The

> > point is broader though - that is, that it is human nature to attach

more

> > credibility to an identifiable source than an anonymous one.

>
> I agree. But the source isn't identifiable. You don't *know* if he/she
> is "Quing Huong" or "Donald Duck", so what's the difference?
>

> >

> >>>If I had some displeasure with the product of someone in the DMX

> >
> > community,
> >

> >>>I would likely address through channels other than this forum.

>
> Why? They're promoting their stuff *here*, trying to get some $ from
> people *here*. If someoe *here* isn't happy with them, why should they
> not receive criticism *here*?
>
>

> > The person in this example is far from anonymous. This person is

actually in

> > your presence.

>
> Nah...presence or not has nothing to do with being anonymous. The word
> means "without name" (from Greek).
>
> This is the "terrible generalization". Now if you had instead

> > said that the diner spray-painted "The steak tastes like fish!" on a

highway

> > overpass, that would have been a good analogy.

>
> ..and if there had been a signature saying "Quing Huong, Ulan Batar"
> along with it, there had also been more credence? ;-)
>
>
> Cheers!
>
> --
> Dan Vendel - *GOF*
> [url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
> Contact me directly by clicking here:
> [url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
> Formmail tutorial:
> [url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
> Nested table demonstration:
> [url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]
>

[Les Matthews]

Please do not interpret my postings as being directed toward you personally.
I have no reason to question your credibility, and it is not my intent to do
so. If I appeared at any time to be questioning such, I apologize.

BTW, I am also not particularly fond of multi-part tutorials.

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:bfkf9t$k1s$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Well, I stand behind what I said and I didn't mean it as a put down. As I
> said I have no problem paying for content, but I find the articles you

have

> offered to be less than...thrilling and I hate the multi-part thing.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Robert Barnett
> [email]rb@galaxyflyer.com[/email]
>
>
> "Les Matthews" <LesAMatthews@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bfka47$c5k$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > It's easier to rant when anonymous. It's the same reason the legal and

law

> > enforcement professions attach less wieght to 'anonymous' tips than to

> those

> > from informants who provide their names.
> >
> > If I had some displeasure with the product of someone in the DMX

> community,

> > I would likely address through channels other than this forum. If I were
> > masquerading as 'GorillaMan', however, I might feel less inhibited to
> > observe accepted mores and might in fact publicly criticize the product

in

> > front of its entire target market. GorillaMan would probably also be

more

> > likely to overstate the case than would Les.
> >
> > If I were to read two completely divergent viewpoints - one from an
> > anonymous poster and the other from a poster with a real name. In the
> > absence of additional information, my inclination would be to more

readily

> > accept the viewpoint of the poster who provided his name. Maybe this
> > inclination is not shared with others, but I think it is.
> >
> > "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_@_the_bottom_of_the_post.com> wrote

> in

> > message news:bfk6u3$2mr$4@forums.macromedia.com...

> > > Les Matthews wrote:
> > >
> > > > I sometimes have difficulty determining the veracity of critical

posts

> > by

> > > > 'anonymous' users. But maybe, that's just me.
> > >
> > > Yeah, I understood that from your previous post, but you're not saying
> > > why. I've heard this before several times, so I'm just curious.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dan Vendel - *GOF*
> > > [url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
> > > Contact me directly by clicking here:
> > > [url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
> > > Formmail tutorial:
> > > [url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
> > > Nested table demonstration:
> > > [url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]
> > >

> >
> >

>
>

[nospam]

Never did, but I thought you had a valid point.

R


"Les Matthews" <LesAMatthews@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bfm38b$jos$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Please do not interpret my postings as being directed toward you

personally.

> I have no reason to question your credibility, and it is not my intent to

do

> so. If I appeared at any time to be questioning such, I apologize.
>
> BTW, I am also not particularly fond of multi-part tutorials.
>
> "nospam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:bfkf9t$k1s$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > Well, I stand behind what I said and I didn't mean it as a put down. As

I

> > said I have no problem paying for content, but I find the articles you

> have

> > offered to be less than...thrilling and I hate the multi-part thing.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Robert Barnett
> > [email]rb@galaxyflyer.com[/email]
> >
> >
> > "Les Matthews" <LesAMatthews@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:bfka47$c5k$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > > It's easier to rant when anonymous. It's the same reason the legal and

> law

> > > enforcement professions attach less wieght to 'anonymous' tips than to

> > those

> > > from informants who provide their names.
> > >
> > > If I had some displeasure with the product of someone in the DMX

> > community,

> > > I would likely address through channels other than this forum. If I

were

> > > masquerading as 'GorillaMan', however, I might feel less inhibited to
> > > observe accepted mores and might in fact publicly criticize the

product

> in

> > > front of its entire target market. GorillaMan would probably also be

> more

> > > likely to overstate the case than would Les.
> > >
> > > If I were to read two completely divergent viewpoints - one from an
> > > anonymous poster and the other from a poster with a real name. In the
> > > absence of additional information, my inclination would be to more

> readily

> > > accept the viewpoint of the poster who provided his name. Maybe this
> > > inclination is not shared with others, but I think it is.
> > >
> > > "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_@_the_bottom_of_the_post.com>

wrote

> > in

> > > message news:bfk6u3$2mr$4@forums.macromedia.com...
> > > > Les Matthews wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I sometimes have difficulty determining the veracity of critical

> posts

> > > by
> > > > > 'anonymous' users. But maybe, that's just me.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, I understood that from your previous post, but you're not

saying

> > > > why. I've heard this before several times, so I'm just curious.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Dan Vendel - *GOF*
> > > > [url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
> > > > Contact me directly by clicking here:
> > > > [url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
> > > > Formmail tutorial:
> > > > [url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
> > > > Nested table demonstration:
> > > > [url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]
> > > >
> > >
> > >

> >
> >

>
>

[Dan Vendel *GOF*]

Les Matthews wrote:

> this debate has gone much further than I originally intended.
>

Yeah, sorry it did, and hope you didn't take it personally? See, I've
usually been interested it *what's* been said, rarely have I cared by
whom. Have always been a bit intrigued by people thinking a bit the
other way around, but never asked until now.

Cheers,

--
Dan Vendel - *GOF*
[url]http://www.vendel.info[/url]
Contact me directly by clicking here:
[url]http://contact.vendel.info[/url]
Formmail tutorial:
[url]http://www.vendel.info/tut/formmail.html[/url]
Nested table demonstration:
[url]http://www.vendel.info/tabletut/[/url]

[Bill .:CMX:.]

Yep. As a non-member, you can get the extension for $2. Honestly, I've used
it quite a bit since I installed it a few days ago.
--
Bill Horvath

Extending Knowledge, Daily
[url]http://www.communityMX.com/[/url]
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
[url]http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm[/url]
No registration req'd for free content
---

"Gene Humbert" <ghumbert@netecin.net> wrote in message
news:bfpkjr$68f$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> Lemme get this stright. As a non-member, I can buy the extension for $2?
> Or is that just for the article describing it?
>
> Gene...
>
> "E. T. Culling" <etcetc@notatcrcwnet.com> wrote in message
> news:bfk988$agm$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > Preview 2 Ext. - a very nice new feature ... and definately worth the
> > price.... thank you!
> > Eleanor
> >
> > "Bill .:CMX:." <billhorvath@nospamjavafueled.com> wrote in message
> > news:bfji5l$nql$1@forums.macromedia.com...

> > > Here's the Latest Content from Your Friends at Community MX
> > >
> > >
> > > Image Preview 2 Extension (Preview images right from the site panel)
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A20832FA1D1A4BDD[/url]
> > >
> > > The CMX Dash Pack [Free]
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A77C19B892610EBF[/url]
> > >
> > > Creating a Batch Process for Adjusting the Brightness of an Image
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A3D5ED747BEBB562[/url]
> > >
> > > A Simple Game with Drag and Drop Interactions
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=ACCE1DA73E6F43C1[/url]
> > >
> > > Using Guides to Help Slice an Image
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AA4BF46FF1DA26F6[/url]
> > >
> > > Fun with the DataGrid Tag, Part I
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AC61813B8941BDC4[/url]
> > >
> > > Contribute to Macromedia's New Product Activation Initiative [Free]
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A61E9FD4034F3AC3[/url]
> > >
> > > Debugging CSS, the Easy Way [Free]
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A33F8E6B1608B4E6[/url]
> > >
> > > Creating Seamless Background Images
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=A78F21E8386F00B8[/url]
> > >
> > > Float: The Bugs, Part I
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AF85B1B881347F29[/url]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bill Horvath
> > >
> > > Extending Knowledge, Daily
> > > [url]http://www.communityMX.com/[/url]
> > > CommunityMX - Free Resources:
> > > [url]http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm[/url]
> > > No registration req'd for free content
> > > ---
> > >
> > >
> > >

> >
> >

>
>