Re: Why is "shutdown abort", then backup bad

Comments embedded.
bbulsara23_at_hotmail.com wrote:
> fitzjarrell_at_cox.net wrote:
>
> > This group is unmoderated, however you are desperately attempting to
> > moderate posts *you* feel are unfit for publication. Such behaviour
>
> Interesting comments and I respect you for your post to this group over
> the past years. However a bit of clarity is needed. I "desperately"
> attempting to do nothing (these are your words). Further there is
> minimal evidence to make this statement. As and for moderating the
> newsgroup, I ask how many times do I read Daniel Morgan demanding
> someone to "apologise" each month (which given his tone is damn
> cheeky). Clearly Daniel Morgan feels some posts are unfit for
> publication too!

So does the charter of this newsgroup, a document apparently you haven't read. It can be found here:

http://members.cox.net/oracleunix/ORACLECH.HTM

and it prohibits sales and marketing posts as there is a suitable newsgroup for such advertisements. Re-read every post to which Daniel Morgan has objected; you'll find them all to be spam, i.e. marketing and sales related posts. Attempting to enforce the charter is far different from attempting to impose ones own sensibilities upon a newsgroup without consensus.

> So your comments apply equally to me and him. I will
> watch out for you replying to Daniels posts over the next month as he
> clearly, to paraphrase your words, "desperately attempts to moderate
> posts" too. I expect there may be just a little hypocrisy in what you
> are writing.

Your expectations are clearly incorrect, as illustrated in my response to your prior statement.

>
> > posted questions. I've yet to see anything from your hand remotely
> > approaching a knowledgeable response; are these invisible to the
>
> Again I write just because someone makes a contribution to the group,
> it doesn't mean they have EARNT some magical right to be rude.

And yet you feel you've earned the magical right to speak for all those who post in this newsgroup without benefit of consultation. That, in my estimation, is rude.

> I read
> and reread your post and it appears to me that the thing that gets your
> goat is that you think some people have earnt the right and others have
> not (because you are challenging me for my attempted "moderation" and
> not so many others).

You posted this, verbatim, in your inital response:

"This tone is not wanted in this newsgroup, from anyone. This includes you Mladen Gogala."

Whom did you survey before posting this remark? From which large group of people currently posting to this forum did you collect this opinion?  Speaking for all when none have been asked is truly an attempt to moderate content as you see fit.

> From my perspective I haven't earnt the right to
> be rude and Daniel has. This is rubbish, neither of us have. My
> argument is that no one has earnt the right to be rude and write RTFM.

This is a help forum, and, on occasion, RTFM is a proper response, especially when those on the receiving end have been given additional advice which has clearly not been taken or when the topic is so ludicrous it is necessary to refer the offending party to the manuals post haste. When you decide to respond to posts with informative replies you can choose how *you* respond; I shall say again it is rude to presume *you* speak for all, far more rude than Daniel Morgan demanding an apology from a vendor posting advertisements in this newsgroup.

> It doesn't matter whether I have contributed to this group or not. That
> is why I posted my polite initial comment to Mladen Gogala because she
> wrote RTFM.
>

Your comment, quoted verbatim, was not polite, it was presumptuous and, as such, RUDE. You've been asked numerous times since your initial misinformed opinion was received who authorised you to issue such a blanket statement and you've refused to answer the inquiry. Instead you attempt to turn the topic about on those posing the questions feebly hoping to deflect attention from your self-serving comments. This has failed, as has your inital foray into moderation of a newsgroup. Will you ever answer the question put before you?

> Jonathan Lewis writes very regularly an e-mail message titled
> "Etiquette - and how to get an answer" to this newsgroup. This could
> also be interpreted as moderation of a newsgroup but I have yet to see
> anyone take him to task about it. The reason it that the man conducts
> himself professionally and we respect him for this and his subject
> knowledge. Jonathan and many others would never write RTFM. And no one
> would accuse him of attempting to moderate the newsgroup either. I
> expect however that one of his motives for repeatedly posting this
> message is however that people in this group often write RTFM and the
> resultant flame war starts. Mladen Gogala wrote RTFM. She should
> retract the comment.
>

Mladen Gogola is a male, not a female, and the response needs no apology nor retraction.

>
> > Were Mary Poppins to suddenly become an Oracle Certified DBA and submit
>
> All I can say is Winnie the Pooh. It is about as relevant.

I have said nothing of your 'judicious' snipping of posts to justify your point, however this last snip of yours clearly puts the quote out of context. To complete the thought you so carefully mutilated:

Were Mary Poppins to suddenly become an Oracle Certified DBA and submit posts to this newsgroup you'd likely find fault with her delivery, as well, as it doesn't match your own.

I stand by my comment, in its entirety. And your misguided response clearly demonstrates your willingness to blame others and your unwillingness to accept personal responsibility. It also illustrates, quite clearly, your desire for others to acquiesce to your opinions. Should you have something to say take personal responsiblity for it; attempting to attribute your whims to the group in its entirety is wrong. If anyone need apologise, it is you for taking such liberties without license.

> Barry

David Fitzjarrell Received on Sun Aug 07 2005 - 16:07:32 CDT