Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: "Steven Lord" <slord@mathworks.com>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: FEX: the ML file exchange censored and stifled by the makers of MATLAB (TMW)
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 11:48:56 -0400
Organization: The MathWorks, Inc.
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <grfsk5$aj3$1@fred.mathworks.com>
References: <gr657p$pdl$1@fred.mathworks.com> <gr66f6$ohc$1@fred.mathworks.com> <gr69o5$a7u$1@fred.mathworks.com>
Reply-To: "Steven Lord" <slord@mathworks.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lords.dhcp.mathworks.com
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1239119301 10851 144.212.105.187 (7 Apr 2009 15:48:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 15:48:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:531082


"us " <us@neurol.unizh.ch> wrote in message 
news:gr69o5$a7u$1@fred.mathworks.com...
> "Matthew Simoneau"
>> We have discussed the feedback that you and others have given regarding 
>> the structure of this contest.  After a lot of discussion and serious 
>> soul-searching, we have decided to let this contest continue through 
>> Wednesday as planned.

To do otherwise would have been unfair to those people who have already 
submitted entries for the contest -- sort of like stopping a game of chess 
once the first knight was captured.

>> You clearly have a different vision for the correct use of File Exchange, 
>> which we built and operate for our community&#8217;s benefit.   Ned 
>> described our thinking here:
>> http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/newsreader/view_thread/248182
>> We encourage you to share your feedback on this thread.   Commenting on 
>> individual submissions isn&#8217;t the right place for this discussion. 
>> We don&#8217;t want participants to feel intimidated from 
>> participating...
>
> dear matthew
>
> i ABSOLUTELY do NOT agree with your beauty-parlor reply!
>
> as a matter of fact: you just - and very sadly so - have confirmed my 
> opinion on the latest development regarding the FEX, which states in a 
> nutshell:
> criticism is good - as long as it does not affect members/goals of TMW... 
> (just look at the copious useless video submissions and pdfs by TMW 
> members, all of which have not gotten a (deserved) one-star rating simply 
> because people were anxious to not loose their license upgrade...)

When you mention "copious useless video submissions and pdfs by TMW 
members", do you mean things like MATLAB News and Notes articles that are 
designed to introduce people to new features, like this:

http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/20967

or videos that explain how MATLAB works and how to use it more efficiently, 
like this:

http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/9060

If someone not from The MathWorks were to have posted those documents, would 
they still deserve a one-star rating?

Let me put things another way, us:  if someone replied to every posting I 
made with a post saying "MATLAB sucks", would that be appropriate?  Or 
should they start a new thread called "MATLAB sucks", to share their opinion 
in one location rather than all across the group?

> as a somewhat longtime FEX/CSSM observer, i do ask you (ie, better your 
> superior TMW officials) sincerely: why (then) did TMW accordingly deal 
> with contributions/reviews of those submissions of a particular person 
> called M....

Yes, that situation could have (in my personal opinion, as someone who's 
dealt with his share of Usenet trolls) been dealt with better.  That was, if 
I remember correctly, the first major trolling of the File Exchange.  I 
haven't spoken to the MATLAB Central team recently, but I imagine they've 
learned from this experience and adjusted their processes to handle such a 
situation differently next time.

> do we deal with double-standards here - we (certainly) know we do not...
>
> i most sincerely DO hope that TMW does NOT start to tweak the FEX, which - 
> after all - is (intended to be) a public marketplace, to its (the 
> money-monger company's lawyers) likings; albeit this unnecessary exercise 
> does not to seem to bode well for the future...

Wait, I'm confused.  Where do lawyers come into the picture?

> as ever, best from zurich
> urs

As always, this is just my opinion, but I wanted to make that explicitly 
clear this time.

-- 
Steve Lord