Re: Data base diagram , help pls
From: Hans Forbrich <news.hans_at_telus.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:18:21 GMT
Message-ID: <NYH4d.77613$KU5.11649_at_edtnps89>
>
> Doesn't seem much different than crossposting, sets up loophole like
> opt-out in email (spammers can comply with can-spam act while putting
> in nasty code in remove or contact link).
>
> Of course, legitimizing the "multiple alternatives" has it's own
> risks. The basic problem is that anyone who's job is marketing is
> going to, at minimum, feel they must try to get any edge possible for
> their product, and that's if they are ethical, which some obviously
> aren't.
>
> I still have mixed feelings about all this. I think that allowing a
> direct response such as Rick's ought to be ok, yet Daniel has
> convinced me otherwise.
>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:18:21 GMT
Message-ID: <NYH4d.77613$KU5.11649_at_edtnps89>
Joel Garry wrote:
> "Mark C. Stock" <mcstockX_at_Xenquery .com> wrote in message
> news:<Op6dncXEVazve8zcRVn-og_at_comcast.com>...
>> "Hans Forbrich" <news.hans_at_telus.net> wrote in message >> news:uql4d.125417$XP3.77689_at_edtnps84... >> | Sybrand Bakker wrote: >> | >> | > On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:20:16 +0200, "Rick van Dijk" >> | > <rick_at_datanamic.com> wrote: >> | > >> | >> >> | >>Maybe our tool, DeZign for Databases is something for you. It is a >> | >>data modeling tool. You can find more info at >> | >>http://www.datanamic.com/dezign/index.html. A 30 day evaluation >> | >>version >> is >> | >>available at http://www.datanamic.com/download/index.html. >> | >> >> | >>Regards, >> | >> >> | >>Rick van Dijk >> | >> >> | >>** Datanamic ** >> | >>Tools for Database Developers >> | >>http://www.datanamic.com >> | > >> | > Please be informed your post is spam, and to promote your own product >> | > in replying is considered unethical. >> | > >> | >> | This one is somewhat tricky. It is a legitimate response to the OP's >> | question. However, we've seen a number of cases where the original >> | question is really nothing more than a setup to 'legitimize' the spam. >> | >> | The response could have also mentioned one or two alternatives. >> | >> | /Hans >> >> Good balance Hans. >> >> I've tried the product, and actually know through a friend of a friend >> one of the guys marketing it in the states -- only to say that Rick's >> legit, I won't comment on the product here, except to say that my >> experience was positive >> >> I could see posting a cross reference to c.d.o.marketplace (see my >> response in ...) just to keep 'altruistic' responses from any 'tainted' >> by marketing -- sound like a good approach?
>
> Doesn't seem much different than crossposting, sets up loophole like
> opt-out in email (spammers can comply with can-spam act while putting
> in nasty code in remove or contact link).
>
> Of course, legitimizing the "multiple alternatives" has it's own
> risks. The basic problem is that anyone who's job is marketing is
> going to, at minimum, feel they must try to get any edge possible for
> their product, and that's if they are ethical, which some obviously
> aren't.
>
> I still have mixed feelings about all this. I think that allowing a
> direct response such as Rick's ought to be ok, yet Daniel has
> convinced me otherwise.
>
It's definitely a fine line. My gut says - as long as the response is not pushing a product, but offering a solution, it's OK. But, as you say, the unscrupulous will use the loophole. (I prefer to think the majority will not be unscrupulous and they will simply end up with egg on their face.)
One example of self-promotion that I really appreciate and want to see continue (as it does provide real and very necessary solutions) is Pete F's security comments.
I'm against the cross-post.
/Hans Received on Fri Sep 24 2004 - 00:18:21 CEST