Re: Announcing: The IBM Customer Advisory Council for Informix

Goldrick, Jim wrote: > I agree. I signed up recently, but I am seriously considering that was a mistake. Lots of chatter here. > Welcome Jim. Just do like the rest of us - ignore these long winded irrelevant digressions masquerading as important concern. Art S. Kagel

Art S. Kagel wrote: > Goldrick, Jim wrote: >> I agree. I signed up recently, but I am seriously considering that >> was a mistake. Lots of chatter here. >> > Welcome Jim. Just do like the rest of us - ignore these long winded > irrelevant digressions masquerading as important concern. > > Art S. Kagel Or do like some of us other folks do, and ignore arrogant, pompous prima donna technicians who don't have any social skills, and think the only thing that's important is SQL code or C-code or chatting about patches or carrying on about their tools. My respect for you just flew out the window. Your contributions while noble are only respected as long as you show respect for others. You just crossed the line with such an arrogant, pompous attitude. Most of those "irrelevant digressions" are every bit as important as anything you have to offer, and I haven't heard a single word disrespecting you or any of your contributions, or comments. So fuck you Art, show some respect. I expect better from you.

> > Art S. Kagel wrote: > > Goldrick, Jim wrote: > >> I agree. I signed up recently, but I am seriously > considering that > >> was a mistake. Lots of chatter here. > >> > > Welcome Jim. Just do like the rest of us - ignore these > long winded > > irrelevant digressions masquerading as important concern. > > > > Art S. Kagel > > Or do like some of us other folks do, and ignore arrogant, pompous > prima donna technicians who don't have any social skills, and think > the only thing that's important is SQL code or C-code or chatting > about patches or carrying on about their tools. My respect for > you just flew out the window. Your contributions while noble are > only respected as long as you show respect for others. You just > crossed the line with such an arrogant, pompous attitude. Most of > those "irrelevant digressions" are every bit as important as anything > you have to offer, and I haven't heard a single word disrespecting > you or any of your contributions, or comments. So fuck you Art, show > some respect. I expect better from you. Art has been contributing to CDI for years, and he has posted more responses than anyone else. He has earned his respect from the CDI community. Paul Watson Tel: +44 1414161772 Mob: +44 7818003457 GO FURTHER with DB2 GET THERE FASTER with Informix. Attend the IDUG 2006 North America Conference. Tampa, Florida, USA. 7-11 May 2006. Visit http://www.iiug.org/conf for more information.

I'll second that.

Paul Watson wrote: >> Art S. Kagel wrote: >>> Goldrick, Jim wrote: >>>> I agree. I signed up recently, but I am seriously >> considering that >>>> was a mistake. Lots of chatter here. >>>> >>> Welcome Jim. Just do like the rest of us - ignore these >> long winded >>> irrelevant digressions masquerading as important concern. >>> >>> Art S. Kagel >> Or do like some of us other folks do, and ignore arrogant, pompous >> prima donna technicians who don't have any social skills, and think >> the only thing that's important is SQL code or C-code or chatting >> about patches or carrying on about their tools. My respect for >> you just flew out the window. Your contributions while noble are >> only respected as long as you show respect for others. You just >> crossed the line with such an arrogant, pompous attitude. Most of >> those "irrelevant digressions" are every bit as important as anything >> you have to offer, and I haven't heard a single word disrespecting >> you or any of your contributions, or comments. So fuck you Art, show >> some respect. I expect better from you. > > Art has been contributing to CDI for years, and he has posted more > responses than anyone else. He has earned his respect from the CDI > community. > I know who Art is you fucking twit, as well as his code contributions. That doesn't justify his pompous, arrogant remarks. Whitewashing it with your servile, retarded comments was hardly worth posting. Art's callous remarks were an attempt to invalidate what people have been saying to the dismay of the loyal, faithful cheerleaders. Just because Art said it, doesn't make it right. Use your pea of brain and think before you say something so fucking stupid next time. Take one for the team when it really matters, not on something that wasn't even directed at you, unless of course you too are a pompous, arrogant ass. Seems like there is a wave of that attitude here, but just because there is a lot of it, doesn't make it right. People have a right to say anything they want, and just because it's not SQL or C code or patches or technical talk doesn't make it less valuable than a fucking software or script contribution. My earnest prayer is to be so totally wrong about the direction Informix is headed in, but even the most casual observer would see that its days are numbered, and what a bunch of fucking bitter enders found here to go with it. Jesus you fucking people are hopeless. > > Paul Watson > Tel: +44 1414161772 > Mob: +44 7818003457 > > GO FURTHER with DB2 > GET THERE FASTER with Informix. > Attend the IDUG 2006 North America Conference. > Tampa, Florida, USA. 7-11 May 2006. > Visit http://www.iiug.org/conf for more information. > > >

<david@smooth1.co.uk> wrote in message news:1139534218.195383.171160@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > I'll second that. > You'll second what?

Double Echo said: > > So fuck you Art, show > some respect. I expect better from you. So, let me get this straight: you berate me for calling Daniel, who has contributed the square root of FUCK ALL to this group, rude names; yet you tell Art Kagel, who has contributed infinitely more (and not just in raw technical issues) than you, me and Daniel put together to "fuck off"? You ARE a hypocrite. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

david@smooth1.co.uk said: > > > I'll second that. David, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SECONDING?????? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

Double Echo said: > > That doesn't justify his pompous, arrogant remarks. Whitewashing it > with your servile, retarded comments was hardly worth posting. Art's > callous remarks were an attempt to invalidate what people have been > saying to the dismay of the loyal, faithful cheerleaders. Just because > Art said it, doesn't make it right. Use your pea of brain and think > before you say something so fucking stupid next time. > > Take one for the team when it really matters, not on something that > wasn't even directed at you, unless of course you too are a pompous, > arrogant ass. Seems like there is a wave of that attitude here, but > just because there is a lot of it, doesn't make it right. People > have a right to say anything they want, and just because it's not > SQL or C code or patches or technical talk doesn't make it less > valuable than a fucking software or script contribution. My earnest > prayer is to be so totally wrong about the direction Informix is > headed in, but even the most casual observer would see that its > days are numbered, and what a bunch of fucking bitter enders found > here to go with it. Jesus you fucking people are hopeless. "Too much caffeine in your coffee"? http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y41/Obnoxio/Smileys/wanker.gif -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Double Echo said: >> So fuck you Art, show >> some respect. I expect better from you. > > So, let me get this straight: you berate me for calling Daniel, who has > contributed the square root of FUCK ALL to this group, rude names; yet you > tell Art Kagel, who has contributed infinitely more (and not just in raw > technical issues) than you, me and Daniel put together to "fuck off"? > > You ARE a hypocrite. > You just see what you want to see clown, as well as the rest of the legion of fools. Code production and holy archive contribution have nothing to do with this. I never said anything about the value of Art's contributions to the holy writ of c.d.i, or sacred scripts, blessed programs, or any of that religious nonsense. I **did** however point out bad manners, and closed minds. And while we're at it, you've obviously got some ax to grind with Daniel, and are too angry about that to take anything he says at face value. It's amazing that he has been defending your holy, sacred Informix, and is STILL berated for it. That I find downright amazing, and practically a trend here. You people would eat your own young before you'd admit to being wrong or being blind. Obviously I am wrong about this group, the majority here is not interested in an open conversation of anything beyond technical issues, or stupid little quips that under any microscope would be seen as clutter. But the mob has voted, and the lynching must proceed. Hang 'em high! ra-ra-ra! Grab a pitch fork, a rake, burn the town!

Double Echo said: > > I **did** however point out bad manners, and closed minds. And while Where I come from, demanding respect AND saying "fuck you" doesn't exactly constitute good manners. You're very quick to jump on a high horse when someone dares to disagree with you. > we're > at it, you've obviously got some ax to grind with Daniel, and are too > angry about that to take anything he says at face value. It's amazing I don't take anything Daniel says at face value. He's the one with the _axe_ to grind, and is clearly only agreeing with you because it encourages you to keep on slagging Informix off. > that > he has been defending your holy, sacred Informix, and is STILL berated for > it. That I find downright amazing, and practically a trend here. You > people would eat your own young before you'd admit to being wrong or being > blind. Obviously I am wrong about this group, the majority here is not > interested in an open conversation of anything beyond technical issues, > or stupid little quips that under any microscope would be seen as clutter. > But the mob has voted, and the lynching must proceed. Hang 'em high! > ra-ra-ra! Grab a pitch fork, a rake, burn the town! I've been wrong before, and I've been hung here for it. I'm not blind to how things work, I've been on the receiving end of all the things you moan about, both from Informix and from IBM. I have noted that while Daniel may be supporting you, he does so only because it supports his pro-Oracle perspective. How many times has he said that he is mercenary and goes where the money is? Yet, he still always finds the time to encourage discord here. If he really was just following the money, he'd find no reason to be here. There is, according to him, no money to be made in Informix. The bottom line is this: unless you spend lots of money with IBM buying Informix, you can forget about influencing them in any way, shape or form. You can rant here to your heart's content and absolutely nothing will change. The only people who can influence IBM to do anything constructive are paying customers, the bigger the better; and they have to get up and say to Ambuj Goyal or Steve Mills: "if you don't do these things, we will go to Oracle." All your posturing on CDI will achieve nothing. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com

david@smooth1.co.uk wrote: > I'll second that. > Context, David, context. Google Groups can be made to work: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>;

Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Double Echo said: >> I **did** however point out bad manners, and closed minds. And while > > Where I come from, demanding respect AND saying "fuck you" doesn't exactly > constitute good manners. You're very quick to jump on a high horse when > someone dares to disagree with you. > Good point clown. I lowered myself, you're right. But you're wrong about how I feel about disagreement. I don't challenge disagreement, what I challenge is the "must speak in SQL or C code here nothing else" attitude from several of the posters. You can say I'm completely wrong, but I will have an issue with you telling me I cannot speak at all. >> we're >> at it, you've obviously got some ax to grind with Daniel, and are too >> angry about that to take anything he says at face value. It's amazing > > I don't take anything Daniel says at face value. He's the one with the > _axe_ to grind, and is clearly only agreeing with you because it > encourages you to keep on slagging Informix off. > Uhm, if you will go back, you'll see that I have been posting for quite some time without help from anyone, LOL. I do respond to weak arguments as best I can, but I admit I'm not the best writer, and often do a bad job of communicating. I've obviously failed miserably since you and others continue to miss my points. *<80) >> that >> he has been defending your holy, sacred Informix, and is STILL berated for >> it. That I find downright amazing, and practically a trend here. You >> people would eat your own young before you'd admit to being wrong or being >> blind. Obviously I am wrong about this group, the majority here is not >> interested in an open conversation of anything beyond technical issues, >> or stupid little quips that under any microscope would be seen as clutter. >> But the mob has voted, and the lynching must proceed. Hang 'em high! >> ra-ra-ra! Grab a pitch fork, a rake, burn the town! > > I've been wrong before, and I've been hung here for it. I'm not blind to > how things work, I've been on the receiving end of all the things you moan > about, both from Informix and from IBM. > > I have noted that while Daniel may be supporting you, he does so only > because it supports his pro-Oracle perspective. How many times has he said > that he is mercenary and goes where the money is? Yet, he still always > finds the time to encourage discord here. If he really was just following > the money, he'd find no reason to be here. There is, according to him, no > money to be made in Informix. > Well, I don't see a lot of Informix work in the market, and what I do find, low-paying and certainly career-suicide at this point to even get involved in it. My own experience has watched Informix disappear from the market to the point where most IT people I talk to don't even know what it is as a product or software. Where I do find it, it is treated as an unknown, an unsure, legacy piece of software, not the bright and shiny thing it used to be. It has lost its appeal because it has NO appeal, it is anon. And now IBM wants to reposition it as embedded. What a tragedy. > The bottom line is this: unless you spend lots of money with IBM buying > Informix, you can forget about influencing them in any way, shape or form. Yeah, this is old school thinking. If Informix goes "FREE" as DB2 has then your argument is invalid. If it is free, then IBM would want to know even more how to stay competitive, and that would mean listening even more to the people in the trenches, the developers, etc etc. This is why I think that CAC may have more value than people realize. IBM will do well if they also enhance the developer track, otherwise, trying to make Informix succeed will indeed be a waste of time. > You can rant here to your heart's content and absolutely nothing will > change. The only people who can influence IBM to do anything constructive > are paying customers, the bigger the better; and they have to get up and > say to Ambuj Goyal or Steve Mills: "if you don't do these things, we will > go to Oracle." > > All your posturing on CDI will achieve nothing. > On that I completely disagree, but I appreciate your negativity is based on a slightly different perspective than mine. But if you are 100% right then what does it matter if people speak their minds. Live and let live. Speak up, loudly, let IBM know what you want. Even if you don't speak C or SQL, speak up, your opinions DO matter.