RE: News Group vs Email Responses (was Re: DESC TABLE <table> does seem to word with ODBC)
I would like to suggest that we should all vote to stop responding to any emails from datagoob. He insists on being rude to some of the most emminent contributors to this list. I can't condone rudeness of the sort he/she has shown in a professional group. Do I have any support on this concept? Regards Malcolm -----Original Message----- From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Data Goob Sent: 02 April 2004 03:59 To: informix-list@iiug.org Subject: Re: News Group vs Email Responses (was Re: DESC TABLE <table> does seem to word with ODBC) Kagel eat a bagel and take a timeout with the other pompous peacocks in the corner. Sounds to me like maybe if the product puts so many people in crisis mode, perhaps the product isn't as good as this group thinks it is? I realize you've got a lot of gung-ho volunteerism going on, but maybe a step back from the chaos might warrant another look? That maybe, just maybe, if you weren't in such a tizzy to respond so quickly that maybe, just maybe, those 5 or 6 extra keyclicks wouldn't be such a problem. There are a lot of other products out there that don't seem to have the crisis elements of Informix you suggest Informix has. From a technical standpoint 5 or 6 keyclicks "being too much" is just plain illogical bullshit. But please don't misunderstand, I appreciate your hard work keeping all the Informix fires under control. :-) Keep up the great effort. Mel Gibson might spot you for his next movie too. "Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message news:pan.2004.04.01.13.17.41.619240.1445@bloomberg.net... > On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 07:54:03 -0500, Neil Truby wrote: > > > Shame on you Goob. You're being a Boob. I can speak for myself and > be reasonably sure it applies to everyone else here. We all have real > jobs to do. And our own DBs and problems to deal with. We all have > lives at home and families to deal with. We help because we've > received help here and want to pass the favor on. Yes the six more > keystrokes to remove NOSPAM from someone's address combined with the > several seconds to realize that the mailer has refused to send the > message out, and in my case possibly to clear the text portion of the > 'address' because my mailer sometimes does not like them, IS a lot in > the middle of trying to get things done. > > Personally I try to also email every poster whose address is NOT > anti-spammed, because I know that in a crisis one cannot wait for the > newgroup to post the reply or to forward it as email to a stressed out > DBA. So, when I ask a poster to refrain from anti-spamming his/her > address it's because I do not have time to add the additional effort > to the effort I'm already applying to help someone else with a > problem, the solution of which may make him look good to his boss, it > will not endear me to mine! > > Art S. Kagel sending to informix-list
Malcolm, I'm not trampling on your emminences, just challenging mere mortals on what I think looks a bit pompous to the casual observer. Peacocks by their nature like to strut their stuff and flash their feathers, typically unaware of their bad behavior. I'm just challenging their behavior not their expertise. So calm down, eat a doughnut, and lighten up. It's just a newsgroup, it's just Informix, not church--or maybe...hmmmmm..... "malcolm weallans" <malcolm.iiug@btopenworld.com> wrote in message news:c4j3mn$e4i$1@terabinaries.xmission.com... > > I would like to suggest that we should all vote to stop responding to > any emails from datagoob. He insists on being rude to some of the most > emminent contributors to this list. I can't condone rudeness of the > sort he/she has shown in a professional group. > > Do I have any support on this concept? > > Regards > > Malcolm > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org] > On Behalf Of Data Goob > Sent: 02 April 2004 03:59 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: News Group vs Email Responses (was Re: DESC TABLE <table> > does seem to word with ODBC) > > > Kagel eat a bagel and take a timeout with the other pompous peacocks in > the corner. Sounds to me like maybe if the product puts so many people > in crisis mode, perhaps the product isn't as good as this group thinks > it is? I realize you've got a lot of gung-ho volunteerism going on, but > maybe a step back from the chaos might warrant another look? That > maybe, just maybe, if you weren't in such a tizzy to respond so quickly > that maybe, just maybe, those 5 or 6 extra keyclicks wouldn't be such a > problem. There are a lot of other products out there that don't seem to > have the crisis elements of Informix you suggest Informix has. From a > technical standpoint 5 or 6 keyclicks "being too much" is just plain > illogical bullshit. But please don't misunderstand, I appreciate your > hard work keeping all the Informix fires under control. :-) Keep up > the great effort. Mel Gibson might spot you for his next movie too. > > "Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > news:pan.2004.04.01.13.17.41.619240.1445@bloomberg.net... > > On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 07:54:03 -0500, Neil Truby wrote: > > > > > > Shame on you Goob. You're being a Boob. I can speak for myself and > > be reasonably sure it applies to everyone else here. We all have real > > > jobs to do. And our own DBs and problems to deal with. We all have > > lives at home and families to deal with. We help because we've > > received help here and want to pass the favor on. Yes the six more > > keystrokes to remove NOSPAM from someone's address combined with the > > several seconds to realize that the mailer has refused to send the > > message out, and in my case possibly to clear the text portion of the > > 'address' because my mailer sometimes does not like them, IS a lot in > > the middle of trying to get things done. > > > > Personally I try to also email every poster whose address is NOT > > anti-spammed, because I know that in a crisis one cannot wait for the > > newgroup to post the reply or to forward it as email to a stressed out > > > DBA. So, when I ask a poster to refrain from anti-spamming his/her > > address it's because I do not have time to add the additional effort > > to the effort I'm already applying to help someone else with a > > problem, the solution of which may make him look good to his boss, it > > will not endear me to mine! > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > sending to informix-list
Data Goob wrote: > I'm not trampling on your emminences, just challenging mere mortals on > what I think looks a bit pompous to the casual observer. Peacocks by > their nature like to strut their stuff and flash their feathers, typically > unaware of their bad behavior. I'm just challenging their behavior not > their expertise. So calm down, eat a doughnut, and lighten up. It's just > a newsgroup, it's just Informix, not church--or maybe...hmmmmm..... You is correct -- is human nature to see yourself as better than other people because they not behave as you or not see thinks your way. Is quite wrong for person helping someone to ask for life to be make easier and he must jump over all hoop because Data Goob say so. Wishes of person asking question much more important than of person answering. Infact, wishes of Data Goob more important than anyone. Data Goob has time to do whatever anyone ask and also answer more question than all others, so he must be right and everyone else must also have time to do this. Jonathon and Art are foolish and waste everyone time on this. No one is allowed to want to do things another way when Data Goob not happy. Also, all internet people must behave in same way, no freedom of the one allowed here. Thank you for convincimg me of this. -- Enor
Where can I buy an Informix prayer rug so I can pay proper hommage to the gods? ( As usual more time was spent on this than the original problem. ) If you want to ignore no-spam email addresses, who cares, do so, but don't go out of your way to tell people your arrogant contempt over something so petty, as if you are all that, it makes you look really self-absorbed, self-important and pompous. A few keyclicks jesus, how difficult is that. Like the world will end if you don't spend those extra few seconds of time to edit an address. You really need to get some perspective if THAT is a problem. By any standard I would have to think you've lost perspective. If you don't get it it doesn't matter, my opinion is as valid as anyone elses. "Enor Mouspenis" <enormouspenis@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c4jo3q$2iubpt$1@ID-64669.news.uni-berlin.de... > Data Goob wrote: > > > I'm not trampling on your emminences, just challenging mere mortals on > > what I think looks a bit pompous to the casual observer. Peacocks by > > their nature like to strut their stuff and flash their feathers, typically > > unaware of their bad behavior. I'm just challenging their behavior not > > their expertise. So calm down, eat a doughnut, and lighten up. It's just > > a newsgroup, it's just Informix, not church--or maybe...hmmmmm..... > > You is correct -- is human nature to see yourself as better than other > people because they not behave as you or not see thinks your way. Is quite > wrong for person helping someone to ask for life to be make easier and he > must jump over all hoop because Data Goob say so. Wishes of person asking > question much more important than of person answering. Infact, wishes of > Data Goob more important than anyone. Data Goob has time to do whatever > anyone ask and also answer more question than all others, so he must be > right and everyone else must also have time to do this. Jonathon and Art > are foolish and waste everyone time on this. No one is allowed to want to > do things another way when Data Goob not happy. Also, all internet people > must behave in same way, no freedom of the one allowed here. > > Thank you for convincimg me of this. > > -- > Enor
Data Goob wrote: > If you want to ignore no-spam email addresses, who cares, do so, but > don't go out of your way to tell people your arrogant contempt over something > so petty, as if you are all that, it makes you look really self-absorbed, > self-important and pompous. Regardless of what my husband might say, I am normally a very patient person. This one put me over the edge. Arrogant, self-absorbed, self-important, and pompous? Neither Jonathan nor any of the others who agree with him deserve being characterized in such a manner. If anything, by pointing out the fact that many people will avoid responding to spam-blocked email addresses, Jonathan was being very helpful in letting people know why they may not be receiving any responses to their questions. Not that it should come as a big surprise. If anyone pays any attention whatsoever to this newsgroup, it has been clear for a very long time that many people will not respond to spam-blocked email. Unfortunately, many people don't bother to look at past threads and need to be reminded of, well, just about everything! >A few keyclicks jesus, how difficult is that. > Like the world will end if you don't spend those extra few seconds of time > to edit an address. You really need to get some perspective if THAT is a > problem. By any standard I would have to think you've lost perspective. Since it seems to have been lost in all this, Jonathan didn't say he would *never* respond to a spam-blocked email address. He said: "I don't usually respond." He also said that if a public reply were in order, he had no problem with that. He was talking about private responses. (Jonathan - if I've misrepresented you in any way, please correct me. Publicly. Privately. However you wish. My email address is valid.) > If you don't get it it doesn't matter, my opinion is as valid as anyone elses. That goes both ways. -- June Hunt