Re: Little design mistakes that can be easily avoided (2): Listenning to CELKO (and CELKO alikes)
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:04:31 -0300
Message-ID: <46598f9d$0$4034$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
>
> I was kinda looking for specifics, Bob; in particular, why /you/ consider
> Celko to be an idiot.
>
> At this point, I'm only curious. I'm certainly not defending the man--as if
> he needed defending by the likes of me! I'd hate to see this evolve into
> what we in another NG refer to as a "Provide Proof Or Retract" challenge.
Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 11:04:31 -0300
Message-ID: <46598f9d$0$4034$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
Bruce C. Baker wrote:
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:4658dd25$0$4028$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net...
>
>>Bruce C. Baker wrote: >> >>>"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message >>>news:4658bf81$0$4043$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net... >>> >>> >>>>Matthias Klaey wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Matthias Klaey wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Chapter 2 of the little things that can be done at little cost to >>>>>>>>avoid misconceptions about RM design. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Lately, I opened a thread that gave opportunity for CELKO to post the >>>>>>>>exact essence of what should *not* be done in design: let >>>>>>>>subjectiveness regulate design instead of logic. I take the >>>>>>>>opportunity of his thread to point out how and why it is wiser to >>>>>>>>ignore such ideas to build better databases. For that I will take >>>>>>>>all >>>>>>>>the posted comments and try to make sense out of them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Regard... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>[...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Hmm. Is this just the usual Celko-bashing in this newsgroup? Did you >>>>>>>intend to write a parody on how to misread and misinterpert other >>>>>>>peoples texts? You don't mean this seriously, do you? >>>>>> >>>>>>Celko is an idiot who need debunking everywhere. You seem to object to >>>>>>debunking idiots. >>>>> >>>>>"Celko is an idiot who need debunking everywhere": This is *your >>>>>opinion* about Celko. I happen to disagree with you (end of *this* >>>>>discussion from my part). >>>> >>>>That Celko is an idiot is a factual matter and not opinion at all. >>> >>>For those of us who are coming a little late to the "Celko is an idiot" >>>thread, could you give a few details about the dimensions of his idiocy? >>>TIA. >> >>groups.google.com
>
> I was kinda looking for specifics, Bob; in particular, why /you/ consider
> Celko to be an idiot.
>
> At this point, I'm only curious. I'm certainly not defending the man--as if
> he needed defending by the likes of me! I'd hate to see this evolve into
> what we in another NG refer to as a "Provide Proof Or Retract" challenge.
You can find more specifics than you will ever figure out how to deal with at groups.google.com Received on Sun May 27 2007 - 16:04:31 CEST