[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Party, and similar type companies, really only have two concerns about such software:

1) Is the presence of such software 'talked' about a lot, to the extent that the amount of talk could hurt their market (ie. scare players away)

2) Does the software provide some level of unfair advantage?

Their publicity material talks about their disliking companies who sell such software (or related services), but it is not at all clear that Party mean that giving it away for free is any better. Possibly the idea of someone giving something useful away for free never occured to them! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I wouldn't put too much reliance on Party's written word ("We do not scan your hard drive or take screen shots from your machine.").

Your program, whether it is free or not, will increase the likelihood of Party responding to its type, because it, and your releasing it, suffers from both #1 and #2 above.

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly cannot predict how they will react to something like this, but I think that many others could have just as easy have done what I have (and I am sure many others have but won't admit it or release their code).

Yes, I could have just kept my version hidden, and until today I pretty much planned on doing this. For example: I had written a Pacific Hangrabber type utility quite a bit before the commercial version was released, but the difference was the Pacific Hangrabber author didn't try to make such a huge profit ($5-$10 was a very fair price for the work required IMO). The comments today in the other thread by the PHT author just didn't go down well with me and my belief system, so this is my way of rectifying it as best I can [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
The question is whether you see Party's increased likelihood of responding as a positive, or negative, consequence to your action?

If you want the technique blocked (if you see this as beneficial to poker), then you've done the right thing, and should continue to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I don't want it blocked, but I think whether their is a commercial version or a free version in circulation will most likely make little difference. I could have kept this quiet and 'underground', but I think at worst this may accelerate their decision making process and force them to clarify their position on applications like this (free or payware).

[ QUOTE ]
If your issue is to do with people selling products that you could write for free, so you do it, and undercut their market, then I don't really understand this. The world is full of people who can do things I cannot (eg. make shoes, give lapdances, etc), and I am happy to pay for their services - if I want them. Or not to pay for them if I don't (as I chose with HHSmithey and PHT).

As skilful and knowledgaable as you are, you're going to be a very busy person if you don't like people charging for anything you can do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe this is just my belief system, but I have always believed in the benefit of sharing knowledge and skills, and if others take advantage of this and don't return the goodwill, then so be it. Others may have a different viewpoint on life and different goals, and everybody is welcome to their own personal ideals, these are just mine... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
In the event that you agree with me Juk, please do not change your behaviour until <u>after</u> you have written a quality replacement for Windows, a spam blocker, and a totally effective virus blocker. I'd be very appreciative [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I have lived through pretty much the whole era of home computers, and all I can say is that a "replacement for Windows" really wouldn't be such a bad thing and if I had multiple lifetimes (and was a more motivated person), yes I would try to right this wrong also, but sadly I don't and this is a different story... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]