Anne Brown - the News Police

[Anonymous]

Dear Anne,

I read your recent posting asking for feedback on making your newsgroups
better. You are right, they are stagnant now and show that your efforts
at censorship are working great. If you look at the number of
participants over the last couple of months, you will see that most of
the names are the regulars.

Customers who bought LT are interested in add-on products that will make
their jobs a little easier. Why go to a newsgroup that offers the same
old stale content. You strictly censor any posting for new add-on
products, therefore you are responsible for the decline in new users of
your newsgroup.

I recently got taken off of the newsgroup by you for simply answering an
inquiry. I also noticed that someone else answered the same inquiry and
did not get taken off. In fact he didn't even answer the question, only
left his advertisement.

Regards, James Padgett
Straight Forward Software

[chisel]

Perhaps James people like you who create add-ons for LT & autocad could set up a page dedicated to 3rd party routines.
I personally would not like to see this page used as a dumping ground for advertisers. As normally happens with over zealous salesmen pushing their wares without regard to others and the original purpose of these groups

[Anonymous]

I have replied to you in email and copied your message and my response
to the online services manager for Autodesk. I have apologized for
totally missing the other blatant ad and removed it upon reading your
message.

I will make an appropriate response to you in email when I have heard
back from him. No one appreciates being told they have killed a
newsgroup. I don't think this is a subject for public discussion and
will not answer here again.
--
Anne Brown
Manager, Moderator
Autodesk Product Support discussion groups
Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion

James Padgett wrote:
>
> Dear Anne,
>
> I read your recent posting asking for feedback on making your newsgroups
> better.

[Anonymous]

Anne,

My intension was not to blame you for the lack of diversity on the
newsgroup, rather Autodesk's policy to try to keep the lid on LT add-on
products. I understand that you are following their direction.

I have copied the posting that I answered below:

>>Is there anything to add to LT 2000i that has some of the
>>bonus menu (R14) features?
>>Marrie

As you know, I was simply informing her of such an add-on. This was not
blatant advertising as you suggest. I think it does illustrate my point
about censorship, though.

James

[Anonymous]

Having just read my Emails, I guess I was the other 'culprit':
sorry, I was just answering the lady's question with a link that
included everyone, or almost everyone's add-ons for LT, which
needs serious help to be useful in production work.

Of course, it is Autodesk's server, and they can set the rules to
anything they want. House rules govern.

Dean

"James Padgett" wrote in message
news:3AFB1E73.4EEA@maui.net...
> Anne,
>
> My intension was not to blame you for the lack of diversity on
the
> newsgroup, rather Autodesk's policy to try to keep the lid on
LT add-on
> products. I understand that you are following their direction.
>
> I have copied the posting that I answered below:
>
> >>Is there anything to add to LT 2000i that has some of the
> >>bonus menu (R14) features?
> >>Marrie
>
> As you know, I was simply informing her of such an add-on. This
was not
> blatant advertising as you suggest. I think it does illustrate
my point
> about censorship, though.
>
> James

[Anonymous]

I guess I started a little war here with my question.
I know this is run by Autocad and was actually hoping they (Autodesk) would
have an add-on like the add-on previously issued by AutoDesk for AutoCAD
R14. I was not asking for any advertizing. I can search the net for that.

Why did they have remove some very nice commands by going to a stripped down
version?
I find Autocad 2000 LT short of a lot of things and AutoCAD 2000 very high
priced and it has features I do not need..
I am hoping for a version for people in our kind of industry (HVAC and
plumbing) that only uses the 2D portion and maybe another version for people
who do extreme modelling and need 3D and all the bells and whistles.
Just my thoughts.
Marrie

[Anonymous]

Marrie wrote in message
news:43407C496BFE6DEFD2C2B9898458BF7F@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I guess I started a little war here with my question.
> I know this is run by Autocad and was actually hoping they (Autodesk)
would
> have an add-on like the add-on previously issued by AutoDesk for AutoCAD
> R14. I was not asking for any advertizing. I can search the net for that.
>
> Why did they have remove some very nice commands by going to a stripped
down
> version?
> I find Autocad 2000 LT short of a lot of things and AutoCAD 2000 very high
> priced and it has features I do not need..
> I am hoping for a version for people in our kind of industry (HVAC and
> plumbing) that only uses the 2D portion and maybe another version for
people
> who do extreme modelling and need 3D and all the bells and whistles.
> Just my thoughts.
> Marrie

"HVAC and plumbing that only uses the 2D portion" ??? Yikes! I'm trying very
hard to stay out of this extremely interesting discussion but I couldn't
help but respond to these words. Umm...are you looking for a HVAC / Plumbing
2D solution? I know of one you could try (see my sig, see my sig). 😉

Sorry for making things worse around here. I don't believe in bugging people
via e-mail - only on open forums.

Anyway, to add non-advertising content to this discussion, I just wish I
knew which avenue Autodesk was taking LT in the future. Should I learn LISP
now, or VBA, or is Autodesk going to expand the DIESEL functions or provide
a new, more robust customizing solution?!?!

Heck, I thought I'd be a regular DIESEL contributor by now but I found out
that starting a business and building your own e-commerce site - well, it's
no small feat for a beginner. I've been humbled allot lately - not as smart
as I thought I was.

P.S. I was reprimanded by Anne some time back - and deservingly so. I
appreciated the private e-mail way that it was handled in my case. I hope
I'm not due another now.
--

Mark
http://www.lt-solutions.com
(Batch Processing / MEP Drafting for AutoCAD LT®)

[Anonymous]

Dean Saadallah wrote in message
news:02847DD1E949B7C1E9941AE4FC83DDE9@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Having just read my Emails, I guess I was the other 'culprit':
> sorry, I was just answering the lady's question with a link that
> included everyone, or almost everyone's add-ons for LT, which
> needs serious help to be useful in production work.
>
> Of course, it is Autodesk's server, and they can set the rules to
> anything they want. House rules govern.
>
> Dean

Heh heh. I remember you mentioning one of my products here not long ago.
Man, I was really flattered! 😉

Anyway, you seem very non-partial by suggesting a variety of possible
solutions. Not to mention how much help you provide the NG...so, I would
take back that apology. 😉
--

Mark
www.feeling_guilty_about_my_sig_now.com
()

> "James Padgett" wrote in message
> news:3AFB1E73.4EEA@maui.net...
> > Anne,
> >
> > My intension was not to blame you for the lack of diversity on
> the
> > newsgroup, rather Autodesk's policy to try to keep the lid on
> LT add-on
> > products. I understand that you are following their direction.
> >
> > I have copied the posting that I answered below:
> >
> > >>Is there anything to add to LT 2000i that has some of the
> > >>bonus menu (R14) features?
> > >>Marrie
> >
> > As you know, I was simply informing her of such an add-on. This
> was not
> > blatant advertising as you suggest. I think it does illustrate
> my point
> > about censorship, though.
> >
> > James
>

[Anonymous]

"Mark Gonzales" wrote in
:


>Anyway, to add non-advertising content to this discussion, I just wish I
>knew which avenue Autodesk was taking LT in the future. Should I learn
>LISP now, or VBA, or is Autodesk going to expand the DIESEL functions or
>provide a new, more robust customizing solution?!?!

Don't hold your breath. If I had, I'd have been dead a long time ago.
Frankly, I've given up hope in this area. Just remember who they are
targeting (from what I see of their ads). Such as the PPT on AutoCAD 2002:
"Complementary Products
AutoCAD LT(r) 2002
The leading 2D CAD product for professionals who actively participate in
the design process, BUT ONLY REQUIRE OCCASIONAL USE."
[Caps at end mine]

True the LT 2000i page says:
"...If you ...are a full-time 2D drafter on a team using CAD for major
projects..."

Supposedly we're gonna get a LT 2002, since it was mentioned with AutoCAD
2002. It will be interesting to see if they put LT on a subscription like
AutoCAD 2002. Not having LT expandable means their selling point for
subscriptions - getting new features as they come out; is DOA. Autodesk
could be making more money with LT, WITHOUT hurting "full" AutoCAD sales,
but obviously they aren't interested.

Enjoy,
Stef
--
mailto: yodersj@ipass.net || Drafter, Leather-worker
http://www.ipass.net/~yodersj/ || Dos, Win, LT
in progress http://computerhowto.homestead.com/
RFC 1855, section 3.1.1, item 10 at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/

[Anonymous]

I just did a search on Autodesk's website for "AutoCAD LT 2002" and
what-do-you-know...it'll take me a while to read all this - I'm printing it
now.
--

Mark

S. Yoder wrote in message
news:Xns90A18AC3DE676yodersj@64.124.46.110...
> "Mark Gonzales" wrote in
> :
>
>
> >Anyway, to add non-advertising content to this discussion, I just wish I
> >knew which avenue Autodesk was taking LT in the future. Should I learn
> >LISP now, or VBA, or is Autodesk going to expand the DIESEL functions or
> >provide a new, more robust customizing solution?!?!
>
> Don't hold your breath. If I had, I'd have been dead a long time ago.
> Frankly, I've given up hope in this area. Just remember who they are
> targeting (from what I see of their ads). Such as the PPT on AutoCAD 2002:
> "Complementary Products
> AutoCAD LT(r) 2002
> The leading 2D CAD product for professionals who actively participate in
> the design process, BUT ONLY REQUIRE OCCASIONAL USE."
> [Caps at end mine]
>
> True the LT 2000i page says:
> "...If you ...are a full-time 2D drafter on a team using CAD for major
> projects..."
>
> Supposedly we're gonna get a LT 2002, since it was mentioned with AutoCAD
> 2002. It will be interesting to see if they put LT on a subscription like
> AutoCAD 2002. Not having LT expandable means their selling point for
> subscriptions - getting new features as they come out; is DOA. Autodesk
> could be making more money with LT, WITHOUT hurting "full" AutoCAD sales,
> but obviously they aren't interested.
>
> Enjoy,
> Stef
> --
> mailto: yodersj@ipass.net || Drafter, Leather-worker
> http://www.ipass.net/~yodersj/ || Dos, Win, LT
> in progress http://computerhowto.homestead.com/
> RFC 1855, section 3.1.1, item 10 at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/

[Anonymous]

"Mark Gonzales" wrote in
:

>I just did a search on Autodesk's website for "AutoCAD LT 2002" and
>what-do-you-know...it'll take me a while to read all this - I'm printing
>it now.

Oh, wow, didn't even think to do that. Hum, looks like we're gonna get
AutoCAD's "authorization" scheme and they are bringing back a network
version.

The text scale command looks interesting, but why couldn't they just go
ahead and make it paperspace-aware? However, I'm wondering what fun awaits
us with the new associative dimensions. Making them assocative through
paperspace to modelspace objects looks nice, but I wonder if it will work
if the modelspace objects are xrefs.

Interesting...
Stef
--
mailto: yodersj@ipass.net || Drafter, Leather-worker
http://www.ipass.net/~yodersj/ || Dos, Win, LT
in progress http://computerhowto.homestead.com/
RFC 1855, section 3.1.1, item 10 at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/

[Anonymous]

Good questions.

I was getting bored with the Internet stuff when I came across p.13 of the
AutoCAD LT 2002 Preview Guide. The Options dialog box shows a Profiles tab,
yet there is no mention of profiles in the document. Hmm.

Also, on the Q&A (question 2.1) on p. 5, it says, "AutoCAD LT 2002 is
available now worldwide in International English. This version began
shipping June 15, 2001."

Huh?!?!
--

Mark

S. Yoder wrote in message
news:Xns90A18F3EEC233yodersj@64.124.46.110...
> "Mark Gonzales" wrote in
> :
>
> >I just did a search on Autodesk's website for "AutoCAD LT 2002" and
> >what-do-you-know...it'll take me a while to read all this - I'm printing
> >it now.
>
> Oh, wow, didn't even think to do that. Hum, looks like we're gonna get
> AutoCAD's "authorization" scheme and they are bringing back a network
> version.
>
> The text scale command looks interesting, but why couldn't they just go
> ahead and make it paperspace-aware? However, I'm wondering what fun awaits
> us with the new associative dimensions. Making them assocative through
> paperspace to modelspace objects looks nice, but I wonder if it will work
> if the modelspace objects are xrefs.
>
> Interesting...
> Stef
> --
> mailto: yodersj@ipass.net || Drafter, Leather-worker
> http://www.ipass.net/~yodersj/ || Dos, Win, LT
> in progress http://computerhowto.homestead.com/
> RFC 1855, section 3.1.1, item 10 at http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/

[rjvs]

I agree that censorship kills the vitality of a discussion group.

I've had a few slaps on the wrist myself. AcadLT without customization

and add-on utilities is a pretty lame product for the money. Beneath all

the bells and whistles lies a seriously crippled version of Acad. Ideas

and news about LT development should be welcome here, even comparissons

with competing products. These are the things that the CAD people

naturally talk about anyway. I guess blatant ads for competing

products that bear no relation to LT, may be a bit much tho.

[Anonymous]

rjvs wrote in message news:f04c67a.1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...



Ideas and news about LT development should be welcome here, even
comparissons
with competing products. These are the things that the CAD people
naturally talk about anyway. I guess blatant ads for competing
products that bear no relation to LT, may be a bit much tho.

"Comparisons with competing products"? Man, that would be some interesting
reading - as long as it's kept on a professional level.

As a small-time AutoCAD LT add-on developer, I welcome the idea. I wouldn't
mind my products being publicly evaluated (praised or criticized) and even
compared with others.

But I believe the developers would need to stay out it - we're all biased
anyway! 😉 Really, let the users compare and converse, and let the
developers learn from the conversation where their product excels or needs
improvement.

I doubt that'll ever be welcome here, though. I mean, on the Adesk servers -
even in a separate NG. Sure would be fun to read, though!
--

Mark
http://www.lt-solutions.com
(Batch Processing / MEP Drafting for AutoCAD LT®)

[Anonymous]

Okay as a LT user I needed a batch plot program being that LT doesn't offer
one. If it wasn't for Mark saying something on this NG I would be beating
myself with my mouse, so I support that 3rd party add-ons are written about
here, if Autodesk would write a better program for the smaller user then we
wouldn't be having this discussion, now would we!!


Drew

"Mark Gonzales" wrote in message
news:3FDC06AE7D75D62697262F0C3671AD4A@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> rjvs wrote in message
news:f04c67a.1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
>
>
>
> Ideas and news about LT development should be welcome here, even
> comparissons
> with competing products. These are the things that the CAD people
> naturally talk about anyway. I guess blatant ads for competing
> products that bear no relation to LT, may be a bit much tho.
>
> "Comparisons with competing products"? Man, that would be some interesting
> reading - as long as it's kept on a professional level.
>
> As a small-time AutoCAD LT add-on developer, I welcome the idea. I
wouldn't
> mind my products being publicly evaluated (praised or criticized) and even
> compared with others.
>
> But I believe the developers would need to stay out it - we're all biased
> anyway! 😉 Really, let the users compare and converse, and let the
> developers learn from the conversation where their product excels or needs
> improvement.
>
> I doubt that'll ever be welcome here, though. I mean, on the Adesk
servers -
> even in a separate NG. Sure would be fun to read, though!
> --
>
> Mark
> http://www.lt-solutions.com
> (Batch Processing / MEP Drafting for AutoCAD LT®)
>

[Anonymous]

Goozie

Its O.K for you I am gonna be shot at dawn!

Gary.

"Goozie" wrote in message
news:FA211FD4E6BD45A85F3D7E649263EE2F@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Okay as a LT user I needed a batch plot program being that LT doesn't
offer
> one. If it wasn't for Mark saying something on this NG I would be beating
> myself with my mouse, so I support that 3rd party add-ons are written
about
> here, if Autodesk would write a better program for the smaller user then
we
> wouldn't be having this discussion, now would we!!