Calculate! February 2005
_____ _ _ _ _
/ ____| | | | | | | | |
| | __ _| | ___ _ _| | __ _| |_ ___| |
| | / _` | |/ __| | | | |/ _` | __/ _ \ |
| |___| (_| | | (__| |_| | | (_| | || __/_|
\_____\__,_|_|\___|\__,_|_|\__,_|\__\___(_)
P R E S E N T E D B Y C A L C G A M E S
___ _ ___ __ __ ___
| __|__| |__ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ |_ ) \ / \| __|
| _/ -_) '_ \ '_| || / _` | '_| || | / / () | () |__ \
|_|\___|_.__/_| \_,_\__,_|_| \_, | /___\__/ \__/|___/
|__/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
...It's.a.Free.Community...............................
...Interviews.with.Patrick.Davidson.&.Michael.Vincent..
...Free.Software.Licenses.Summary......................
...Ask.the.Nerds.......................................
...Rather.Unknown.Feature.of.the.Month.................
...Letter.from.the.Editor..............................
...Saying.Goodbye.to.CalcGames.........................
Newsletter Staff
Newsletter Editor:
George Limpert <redux@calcgames.org>
Contributing Editors:
Barrett Anderson <barrett@calcgames.org>
Nikky Southerland <allynfolksjr@calcgames.org>
Also Contributing:
Joe C. <thejccorp-helpme@yahoo.com>
Stealth688 <Stealth688@aol.com>
Rikeen Patel <RIKEEN29@aol.com>
MLBr24 <MLBr24@att.net>
Special Thanks to:
Michael Vincent <michael@radicalsoft.org>
Patrick Davidson <pad@davnet.org>
----- It's a Free Community -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by George Limpert <redux@calcgames.org> |
| community is written by amateur programmers. Many of
A few years ago, the question was posed many times -- | these programmers are high school students with little
will there ever be shareware on calculators? The answer | or no programming experience. Unfortunately, being
by the masses of the community was an emphatic no. The | confronted with assembly language is like throwing
idea was tossed around on message boards but never | someone with no clue about swimming into the deep end
taken that seriously. That was until developers at TI | of a pool. Sure, there's a lot of information available
had the same idea and implemented the necessary | to the beginning programmer, but actually understanding
technologies in the form of Flash applications. Free | that information and knowing where to begin is rather
software still dominates the community, but many | difficult. The documentation is often written from the
developers have become more and more protective of | perspective of someone who is familiar with the topic
their work. This has led to programmers refusing to | being discussed and doesn't think of it from the
allow major sites to host and distribute their work. | viewpoint of a novice. One of the best ways to learn
Furthermore, a large portion of the software in the | programming is through looking over source code written
community is distributed without source code. While it | by others.
isn't hard to see the views of many developers, there |
is a strong argument to be made for eliminating the | Many computer science programs in school are taught
use of restrictive software licenses. | from an engineering perspective. While teaching
| students programming techniques, these curriculums also
The notion of restricting free distribution of most | attempt to educate students in ethical behavior. One of
calculator software is impractical. Without resorting | the more commonly used ethical codes is that of IEEE.
to Flash applications, it is next to impossible to | One of the major points in this code is that an
prevent software from being sent from calculator to | engineer is expected to assist others in becoming
calculator with a simple link cable. If distribution is | better engineers. The same can be applied to the
that simple, and it's clearly impractical and nearly | community of calculator enthusiasts; programmers ought
impossible to enforce licensing restrictions in this | to assist other users who wish to learn programming.
environment, it is also silly to prohibit sites from | While not the only method, one of the best ways for
redistributing software, provided they have good intent | programmers to accomplish this is by releasing the
in doing so. | source code to their software.
|
Many programmers write software for the purpose of | The community of calculator enthusiasts is entirely
solving a need they have. But when these developers | supported from within. Calculator programming isn't
choose to distribute their software, the only | taught in schools and corportations aren't flocking to
reasonable motive is so other people can use their | release development tools. There aren't authors writing
software. Keeping this in mind, restricting sites from | books on software development for calculators. The
distributing software seems counterproductive. While | community relies on its members to educate new users
some developers may do this with the intent of | and to keep the community afloat. Most programmers, if
receiving publicity, there is still the underlying | not all, benefit from free software distributed by
motive of benefitting the community as a whole. | other members of the community. Programmers and users
| ought to feel a bit of an obligation to the community
Keeping with this theme, nearly all the software in the | that provides for them.
----- Interviews with Patrick Davidson & Michael ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Vincent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by George Limpert <redux@calcgames.org> |
|
Contributions from: | ticalc.org (and of course also calcgames.org)
Patrick Davidson <pad@davnet.org> | to remove the file from their archives would
Michael Vincent <michael@radicalsoft.org> | do much more to stop its distribution than any
| copyright stuff ever would.
I had the pleasure of conducting not one but two |
interviews with prominent developers within the | George: Aside from the licenses we've already
community. Michael Vincent and Patrick Davidson both | discussed, there are a multitude of others,
took time out of their busy schedules to be interviewed | even within the TI community, that are less
on the topics of free software, software licensing, and | free. That is to say they take away certain
free software as they relate to calculators. | rights such as distributing the software or
| modifying the software. In some cases,
Presented here is both interviews, starting with my | software released under these licenses includes
conversation with Patrick. | source, but prohibits creating derivative
| works. What do you see as advantages of your
George: I know you're a prominent developer of free | license over these less free licenses?
software, and you've released your software |
into the public domain in the past but have | Patrick: Well, that one seems more clear.
since chosen another (similar) license. Can you | If they can't create derivative works, then
highlight the points of both the public domain | there won't be any derivative works, which
and the license you've currently opted to use? | makes the software less useful since it can't
| be used for making new stuff.
Patrick: The main point of public domain is simply the |
absence of copyright, which means there are no | George: To some, that might not be a disadvantage.
copyright restrictions on the work. Public | There's been some unfortunate incidents of code
domain may not always qualify as "free | theft in the past. Preventing derivative works
software" by the GNU definition, in particular | also prevents code theft. What are your
if you don't include the source code. | thoughts on this?
|
My own new license should have little | Patrick: well, what is "code theft" defined as, other
practical difference, since even though it | than creating a derivative work without
says the work is copyrighted, it also | permission?
indicates that you can copy and modify with no |
restrictions. In the documentation there is a | Since I believe that allowing derivative works
polite request to keep the software free but | is beneficial then the idea of "code theft"
it's not stated as a requirement. | doesn't worry me. Though perhaps you meant
| that people will copy the code without
George: What prompted you to switch away from releasing | acknowledging the original author.
software to the public domain? |
| George: There have been some past reports of software
Patrick: well, some people argue that you can't | being redistributed unmodified except changes
actually place something in public domain, but | to the title and credits.
that it can only become PD when the copyright |
expires, and perhaps more importantly, a much | Patrick: But if they are likely to do that, they will
larger number of people are completely | do so even if the license terms tell them not
ignorant as to what public domain means | to.
|
George: That's very true. And current legislation is | George: Do you feel that there are benefits to the
extending copyright lengths effectively | community if source code is distributed freely?
preventing many works from entering the public | For example, do you feel this will be
domain that would otherwise have done so. | beneficial by providing examples to beginning
Anyway, there are many other free licenses | programmers?
available such as the GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT, and |
Mozilla Public licenses. What factors caused | Patrick: Well, if they distribute with only titles and
you to choose the license you did? | credits changed, there's not much that can be
| done to stop that other than getting web sites
Patrick: My main reasons for avoid other licenses (GPL | to remove it. Even if you don't spread source
and LGPL in particular) are practical rather | at all people can still change those things in
than philosophical. For one thing, very few | the binary.
users of calculator games will ever even read |
the GPL or LGPL, much less understand it. I | Anyway, there should be benefits to the
know that I didn't properly understand the GPL | community. First of all in that it allows a
the first time that I read it. There are | greater variety of software, since anyone can
quite a few specific requirements in the GPL | now make a new program without writing one
that I think are very inappropriate for | from scratch. And yes, it should also provide
calculator games. For one thing, it obliges | plenty of examples. In fact, one of the most
anyone who distributes the program to send a | common reasons I've seen given for not
copy of the license along with it. This seems | distributing source code is "it's such a mess
to mean that if you're sending between | I don't want people to see it." But of course
calculators at school, for example, you also | I don't think that is the case for my own code
have to send them the GPL text (or maybe hand |
them a printed copy). This is very | George: You mention messy code as a reason to not
impractical since (depending on which | distribute source. Do you feel that poorly
calculator you have) the GPL text alone may | commented source might be harmful to
take up more than half of the calculator's | beginniners -- that is, if they're looking for
memory. Plus, who really expects school kids | help and find confusing code, it might
to follow such a rule? | discourage them?
|
A similar problem is the requirements for | Patrick: Maybe, but I don't think it is likely. The
someone who distributes it as a binary to make | benefit of looking at someone's code is more
source available. Most of the school kids | in getting the ideas of how a large program
don't even know what source code is so how can | goes together, not that you can learn every
they follow these rules? | last detail from it. Short example programs
| or documents would be better for the latter.
For computer programs where everyone downloads | If someone sees the program is mess, one would
from web sites it might be practical for these | hope that they jsut realize that program is
rules to be followed (especially since, for a | confusing, but that if they program themselves
site, allowing equivalent downloads of the | they could do it better if they wanted to.
source is enough) but on the calculators, |
user-to-user transmission is very common. | George: Richard Stallman is a rather famous supporter
Of course, very few of the people who have a | and developer of free software. He believes
"GPL" calculator program would know about | there is a right to see source code to software
these GPL requirements. | you execute. There is certainly an argument to
| be made for this in an era when even respected
But I don't think it's a good idea to say | companies distribute software with spyware and
"let's make a bunch of complex license terms" | harmful payloads. This sort of thing does not
and then simply not care if people follow | have a history of happening on calculators,
them. If you don't care if people follow the | however. Do you feel that this argument for
terms, I don't see any point in having them. | open source still has any relevance when
| applied to calculators?
George: Those are all excellent points. But what about |
another important part of the GPL -- a strong | Patrick: I'm not quite sure it was really well
copyleft restriction? That is to say that if | established that it's a right to begin with.
you modify the software or make a derivative | It certainly is beneficial, and since it costs
work from it, that the additional work must | nothing extra to give people the source code,
also be released under the GPL? What is your | there seems not to be much reason not to.
opinion of copyleft? |
| The original justifications from Stallman
Patrick: That's definitely a harder question. :) | was not that making source available stops
I'm actually not completely sure about whether | malware, though. Malware certainly could
copyleft is in general the best way to go. | become an issue on calculator, but here again,
Though I tend to think it isn't when it comes | I think it would be most effective just to get
to calculators. | it removed from the main sites. The average
| user wouldn't be able to examine source for
Even if I wrote my own (much simpler) copyleft | malicious features anyway.
that exempted binary copies between |
calculators from its restrictions, it would | George: What benefits, if any, have you received from
still not necessarily always be followed. | releasing your source code and software under
| a free (as in speech) license?
So the question is ... do I really want to try |
to use copyright restrictions against non-free | Patrick: millions of adoring fans, of course :)
derivative versions? | After all, imitation is the sincerest form
| of flattery, and just look how many "phoenix
As I said above, I don't believe there is any | variations" are on ticalc.org!
point in putting in a copyright restriction |
unless I actually intend to demand people | George: Very true. What advice would you have for those
follow it. From a practical standpoint I | considering releasing software under a free
think that by allowing more choices of | license?
software to be out there, there's more benefit |
than harm if someone does in fact make a | Patrick: just do it! (but not in GPL for the reasons
non-free derivative version. There is still a | I've already mentioned). More specifically,
request (not a demand) to keep it free in the | there's no problems that will come as a result
manual. | I certainly haven't had any problems from it,
| but it has allowed not only adapted versions,
In the case of PC software, there are more | but also allowed some people to learn from it.
advantages to copyleft, since there is a |
significant chance a proprietary software | George: Those are good points. And you've made a lot of
company would try to base one of its products | interesting points tonight -- certainly one of
on your free software, and copyleft would at | the best interviews I've had the privilege of
least make sure you can get them to pay you | being a part of. I'd like to thank you for
for permission to do so. | taking the time out of your evening to talk
| with me. I'm sure the rest of CalcGames' staff
Getting back to calculator programs, I don't | and the readers thank you as well.
think there's much chance I'll ever sue anyone |
over any calculator game anyway. If I ever | Patrick made some very interesting points about
want to stop the distribution of a derivative | software licensing and takes his choice of license very
program that I don't like, politely asking | seriously. It's a very thought provoking interview.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I talked with Michael, I wasn't as interested in | functions. What about poorly commented code,
discussing the specifics of the licenses as I was in | which is an unfortunate habit among many
inquiring about the consequences of releasing source | programmers? Do you still see a benefit to
code to software. This interview focuses on a slightly | releasing source to these programs?
different aspect of free software. |
| Michael: It still doesn't hurt anything. If it's useful
George: Well, to start this off, what license(s) do you | to even one person, then it's been a benefit.
release your software under, and what are the | So yes, release the source.
main points of these licenses? |
| George: Richard Stallman, of the FSF, has stated he
Michael: to spice up things a bit. The GPL provides for | believes there's a right to see the source code
the inclusion of the source code with all | one runs on their computer. This argument has
distributions of my programs. Essentially, | even more weight today in an era of spyware
anyone can then modify and release a program, | and viruses. Such ill-behaved programs have not
provided they keep my copyright notices intact | been a problem on calculators. Do you feel
and include the source code. With Krolypto's | there is such a right to be able to see source
BSD license, you can use the Krolypto source | code to software, however?
code in programs without being required to |
share your source code as well. It's more | Michael: Absolutely not. There's no such "right". If
lenient than GPL is. | you don't like the software, then you don't
| use it. I'm not one of those radical
George: There's many free software licenses available | "everything should be open and free" people.
including the GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT, Mozilla | When you download software, you are implying
Public, and other licenses. What has caused | that you agree with it. If someone wants to
you to choose the GPL and BSD licenses? | see all the source code for every program on
| his computer, then that person wouldn't
Michael: Sadly enough, I have to answer name | download Microsoft products. Stick to free
recognition. Hopefully everyone has heard of | software then. It bothers me when people use
the GPL, although the BSD license is less | binary-only software and then cry that they
known. I didn't see how I could possibly go | have a right to demand that a company furnish
wrong by choosing them, as they provided | them with the source code. It just seems
enough copyright protection to satisfy me as a | ridiculous. Source code is a choice - it can't
programmer. | be a right.
|
George: Moving along, there's many licenses used that | George: Have you experienced any benefits from
aren't quite as free. For example, they might | releasing your software under a free license?
restrict your rights to modify the software, or |
you might not even receive the source. Some | Michael: I have had one or two people find bugs in
authors object to their works being | Omnicalc and then attempt to show me where in
redistributed, even. What made you choose a | the source the problem is. But overall, my
freer license? | benefit has been the satisfaction of seeing
| people tinker with it and write their own
Michael: Calculator programs are in an unusual market | hacks for the TI-OS.
in that most people learn assembly by studying |
other programs. There is also nearly zero | George: Would it be fair to say you feel the greatest
profit potential for calculator software. | benefit of releasing source code is the
Thus, it seemed quite logical to me to use a | improvement of the community, and that someone
free license. I ask: Why not use a free | might learn from code you release and write
license? I don't see compelling reasons. | software that's useful to you?
|
George: Unfortunately, there's been incidents of code | Michael: Yes I would. As I stated, the primary benefit
theft in the past. This is one reason offered | for me has been personal satisfaction. The
to not distribute source code, or to choose a | community's improvement is far greater,
less free license. Do you feel this is an | however, as other people can learn and expand
issue? | upon my work. As far as other software being
| useful to me, I have to admit that I'm not an
Michael: Not a significant one. It is true that | end-user of calculators anymore; I just keep
releasing your source code makes source code | mine for programming. Yes, in theory the
theft easier. But it does not make it right. | programmer should see dividends of his work
By that same argument, we shouldn't sell CD-RW | returned to him through other people's
drives because they make music 'theft' easy. | software. It just doesn't always work that
As long as you still hold the copyright over | way.
your program, you are protected against code |
theft. I will concede though that in some | George: What advice would you have for people
cases you might have trouble getting people to | considering releasing software under a free as
respect your copyrights. | in speech license and including the source
| code?
George: You mention that programmers learn assembly |
language by studying other programs. A large | Michael: Do it! For calculators, you have nearly
program, however, is likely to be complex and | nothing to lose and the stakes are quite low.
difficult for a beginning programmer to | It won't harm you and if you develop
understand. Do you feel there is still a | irrational phobias of code theft, you can
benefit to the source code being publicly | always revert for future projects. If you're
available? | nervous, look at Patrick Davidson. He takes
| open source to an extreme, in fact
Michael: Yes. Even the largest programs are usually | relinquishing all copyrights to his work and
logical chunks of routines. For example, if | placing it in the public domain. Yet he is
you wish to study Cabamap, you can examine | still hailed as one of the best Z80
only the multiplication routine and only have | programmers ever.
to know the functions of a few other routines. |
You wouldn't, for example, have to study the | George: Okay. Thanks for your thoughts on free software
insanely complicated division routine to see | and open source in calculators. It's been a
how multiplication works. People also call | very interesting and thought-provoking
Omnicalc complex and yet I know many people | interview.
who have implemented all sorts of hacks into |
it. | In my time as a news editor at various calculator
| sites, I had the pleasure of conducting interviews with
George: That's a good point. It relies on one thing | several of the best minds and most influential people
that you assume -- the program is | in the community. I can't think of any interviews,
well-commented, so people know which routines | however, that match up to these. Many thanks are owed
are where and what chunks of code serve what | to Michael Vincent and Patrick Davidson for their time
| and thoughts on these issues.
----- Free Software Licenses Summary -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by George Limpert <redux@calcgames.org> |
|
Anyone who is familiar with the open source movement is | restriction is the Mozilla Public License (MPL) which
probably familiar with acronyms such as GPL, LGPL, BSD, | was created by the Mozilla Organization. With the GPL
MIT, and many others. While some of these acronyms have | and LGPL, incorporating source code from programs
other meanings, they also refer to software licenses. | requires the entire program be released under the
It's often confusing to programmers what each license | license. The MPL, however, requires only files that
is and what restrictions the license entails. Hopefully | contain source code that was originally under the MPL
this article will make the picture a little clearer. | to be made available. This means that portions of a
| project may use source code from software licensed
To be considered a free license, the software should | under the MPL while other portions of the same project
include source code, grant the user the right to modify | may be proprietary. Also, the MPL only requires source
and redistribute the source code, and give all users | code to be made available for one year.
these rights even if they are commercial users. While |
all truly free licenses have these elements, there are | The MIT and BSD licenses are effectively the same
still substantial differences. | license. They do not contain a copyleft restriction,
| although they place some restrictions. Source code from
The main differences between the various licenses is | BSD licensed software, even when modified must have the
the degree of copyleft restrictions. Copyleft is | copyright notice. Also, the names of people and
intentionally similar to the word "copyright" and | organizations that contributed to BSD licensed software
actually relies on copyright laws to be effective. The | may not be used to promote derived works.
principle of copyleft is that not only is the original |
work free, but all modified works must also remain | Older versions of the BSD license also included a
free. | notice requiring that executable software including
| source code from BSD licensed software display a
A rather strong copyleft license is the GNU General | copyright notice. A few years ago, this requirement was
Public License (GPL). This requires users distributing | removed from the BSD license.
executable versions of the software to also make the |
source code available to users upon request for three | The main feature of the MIT and BSD licenses is that
years. The only fee one may place on distributing the | source code from software released under these licenses
source code is the fee for the media the source code is | may be incorporated into proprietary software without
distributed on. This means that if the source code is | releasing any source code.
distributed on CD, the only fee allowed is the price of |
a CD. The GPL requires that users receive a copy of the | Many other free software licenses exist with different
GPL along with the actual software. Like all free | restrictions to meet the unique needs and desires of
software licenses, the GPL permits the software to be | developers. If there isn't a free software license with
modified and redistributed. All derived works, however, | the terms and conditions you want, you can always
must also be released under the GPL. | create your own. This is done often and there are over
| 30 distinct open source licenses.
The LGPL, also known as the Lesser General Public |
License, is very similar to the GPL, but it is intended | While it is not necessarily a free software license, it
for software libraries instead of entire programs. The | is also worth mentioning the public domain. Once a work
main difference is a program must be released under the | is released into the public domain, there are no
GPL if it links to a library licensed under the GPL. | restrictions on its use. There is no copyright on the
The LGPL does not contain this restriction. | work. This may not, however, qualify as free software
| under some definitions of free software since there is
A more recent license with a weaker copyleft | no guarantee that source code is released along with
| software in the public domain.
----- Rather Unknown Feature of the Month -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Solver on the 83 Series |
by Nikky Southerland <allynfolksjr@calcgames.org> |
|
If you're familiar at all with a 68k calculator, you're | now time to solve it. Press down on your keypad, and it
probably aware of its ability to solve for one | will display a screen that has the variables in your
variable (and other features, but lets not get into | equation. If your equation has more than one, you must
that now). Well, the 83 series can also solve an | make sure that the others are defined, or the result
equation like this one for X: 5x+17=3x | will be inaccurate. So then, let's say you want to find
| what X equals; simple. Just move your cursor by the X,
How you may ask? Using the "Solver" feature. You can | and press Alpha+enter. Your calculator will then tell
find this nifty tool in your math menu, then scroll | you what X equals.
down (or press zero) to enter it. Once there, you'll |
notice that it allows you to enter a equation equal to | Example: 3x+12y=(8x)^2, solve for X
zero, and you can change the other side. Before you | 1. Goto the solver (Math, 0)
panic (because your equation has two sides to it!), | 2. Type in ((8x)^2)-(3x+12y) next to the 0= part
remember a simple rule of math, it goes something like | 3. Press down.
this: "<one side>=<another side>" is the same as | 4. Define Y, (like as 2 or 17 or something)
"0=<one side>-<another side>" | 5. Goto X, then press alpha enter
| 6. Your calcualtor will do some nifty crunching and
Now that you (hopefully) entered your equation, it's | spit out what X equals. (Which should be -1.4767...)
----- Ask the Nerds ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
This month's question was submitted by our very own Joe | and sending the backup to the calculator. Assembly
C., who wants to know why calculators use shells. | language programs were stored as strings, but
| could only be executed from within a shell. On the
| TI-85, the shell was launched through an item
Question: | placed in the CUSTOM menu.
I was browsing the site and started wondering... I |
know how a shell works, but why do programmers | The original shell, ZShell, was really a kernel
choose to program for them instead of nostub? | bundled with a shell. Following a series of other
| shells, one finally came along to replace ZShell.
Answer: | Several of the best programmers in the community,
While shells aren't necessary to run assembly | many of which you might recognize from the staff
language programs on recent calculators, many come | list on ticalc.org, came together to create
with kernels that provide useful features that the | Usgard. This was the first shell to allow users a
TI-OS or AMS does not provide to the programmer. | choice of shell interfaces. Several choices, also
These features include correcting awkward behavior | stored as strings on the calculator, were
of the operating system, loading libraries created | available.
by other programmers, and offering additional |
functions not provided by the operating system. | While shells still provide some useful features,
| they are also largely a holdover from the history
Shells, however, once served a much more important | of assembly language programming on calculators.
purpose. On the TI-82, TI-85, and TI-92, there is |
no easy way to launch assembly language programs. |
The TI-85 was the first calculator to have user | We're always looking for questions from our readers
created assembly language programs. This was done | about community history, calculator help, or anything
by modifying a backup of the calculator's memory | else of interest. If you've got something you'd like to
| ask, please mail your question to redux@calcgames.org.
----- Letter from the Editor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by George Limpert <redux@calcgames.org> |
|
I know I've promised many times to get this newsletter | represent the entire community to get involved. That's
out and many times it's been delayed. Among other | why we've decided to hire many writers instead of just
reasons, I put this newsletter off in hopes that | a single news editor to take my job.
members of the community might submit additional |
content at the eleventh hour. That obviously hasn't | It's time for the barriers to come down. Right now,
happened. | CalcGames is in a period of transition. Barrett is
| leaving and I'm passing on my duties to others. We're
One of the unfortunate things about CalcGames is the | confident that when we come out on the other side that
lack of involvement by much of our large community. | we'll be the best calculator site in the community.
Believe it or not, we've got a very large userbase. |
The site is also run by a group of administrators who | ----- Saying Goodbye to CalcGames ---------------------
represent this small segment of our users. While this | by Barrett Anderson <barrett@calcgames.org>
isn't very different from the various sites and the |
community as a whole of the past, it's something we're | Hey everyone, I'm somewhat busy right now so I'll make
working to change. | this short. First let me say that it has been a
| wonderful nearly three years working at CalcGames.org.
Getting hired by a large calculator site is no easy |
task if you don't have any name recognition with the | For those of you who don't know who I am and what I've
community. On the other hand, getting the necessary | been doing -- I have done a fair amount of back-end
name recognition without working for one of these sites | coding for the site, along with some calculator
or being a prominent programmer is no easy task. This | programming. I have been an administrator here ever
places a barrier between most of the community and the | since the site opened in March of 2002.
largest sites. It's time for that barrier to come down. |
| I will be spending the next two years in The Dominican
We're looking to make our site appeal to a larger | Republic serving as a missionary for my church, and I
portion of the community than it does now. While we'll | will not be participating in CalcGames.org or the
still provide the archives we always have, we're | community in any way during that time. Don't worry,
working to add other content of interest to gamers, | though; I am confident that the site will run smoothly
beginning programmers, and experienced users alike. | while I am gone.
We're looking to start creating content instead of |
just distributing content others have made. | Considering that this site has been open for three
| years, and that it seems like yesterday when it was
That's where we need your help. We're not looking for | first opened, two years doesn't seem like very much
people with impressive credentials to e-mail us and let | time at all.
us know they're interested in helping out with |
CalcGames. We're looking for ordinary users who | ~I'll be back~
===============================================================================================================================
Portions Copyright (C) 2005 CalcGames.org
The parts of the newsletter not written by CalcGames
staff are copyrighted or otherwise licensed by their
authors.
|
