[abcusers] Re: abcusers-digest V1 #584

[Spotbeagle]

First why does digest come from UnknownSender@UnknownDomain? What kind of list is this any way.  A couple of weeks ago, when I signed up, I got a couple of tunes, that was cool.  Now it's all about a bunch of arguing about arguing, about a code that apparently changes every time someone writes a program to run it.  If these guys writing the programs are to stupid to stick with the original then just delete the program, and the ignorate files they generated.  Then tell people that it doesn't work.  Besides How hard can it be to agree on a simple code like X: 1 T:Jump At the Sun M:6/8 L:1/8 C:John Kirkpatrick 1972 R:jig K:Em |:EGB ^A2B|EGB ^A2B|eBB eBB|BAG F3 |EGB ^A2B|EGB ^A2B|eBB cBA|GAF E3:| |:eBB gfe|fBB agf|gfe gfe|f^dB c2B |eBB gfe|fBB agf|eBB cBA|GAF E3:| It's not like most all are written about like this, any way. If it doesn't follow the out line on the ABC homepage, junk it. I for one figured out one thing, If it doesn't run on "yaps," or abcmidi, it's gone.  I'm not about to run a bunch of junk that doesn't run halfway right.  Or load a dozen programs to see if one works on a stupid tune that I can't play any way. If the ABC2WIN piece of junk wasn't for convenience, it would have been gone long ago.  The only good thing about it, is the fact that it quickly plays the simple tunes on the PC speaker.  As long it has no cords, or lyrics.  It crunches the notes together in a little line when you "draw" the tune.  You ought to see what happens if it has lyrics. Can you imagine someone didn't even have enough pride that they released this thing to the public.  Then has the nerve to ask you to send them money.  Come on what did it take, all afternoon to develop this.  In a message dated 11/2/2001 8:53:52 AM Central Standard Time, UnknownSender@UnknownDomain writes: > Instead of arguing on loose points, abcusers could debate on > specific points, and "vote" for the resolution of them. Actually, this is  exactly what a number of reprobates have been asking for ages on this list, of course implying that the results of the ballot had to be incorporated in the standard... we do have experienced a couple of problems so far: > You can't change the past.  There are tens of thousands of ABC files > already out there on the web and a lot of them conform to no standard > that has ever existed.  They're not going to disappear, most are not > going to be fixed on their home sites, many will go on echoing down > the years in their original form on mirror sites even if they do get > fixed by their creator, and they're not going to lose their musical > value.  So new standards won't help avoid the need for editing. So you think writing a standard would prevent this?  There's to many jokers out their that think they have to change everything around, thinking they'll make a "name" for them selves.  When all they'll be remembered for is totally screwing up something that worked.