Re: Career questions: databases
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 10:25:52 GMT
"DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_psoug.org> wrote in message
> David Cressey wrote:
> > "dreamznatcher" <tashfeenmahmud_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1183326800.623379.185720_at_g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jul 2, 1:51 am, "Neil" <nos..._at_nospam.net> wrote:
> >> I'm really perplexed here. I never on heaven or earth could have ever
> >> imagined a single word I used could have spawned all this...
> > Most of this is due to the rantings of DA Morgan, and to responses to
> > Morgan seems to have proposed a standard of proficiency that involves
> > addressing an audience of 200 of one's peers, taking questions on the
> > and using SQL-Plus to express the answers.
> > There's a simple explanation for this: he's trying to "out alpha"
> > regular. If you'll look at the history of his contributions, you'll
> > understand.
> Not another regular ... or I'd agree with you and would never have
> written what I did.
Bob Badour is a regular in news:comp.databases.theory and if the thread had not been crossposted there, I doubt that Bob would have responded.
> The word proficiency has a dictionary definition. That is what the word
> means. If you wish to redefine it take it up with Daniel Webster not
Your proposition to Bob does not follow from the dictionary definition of "proficient", and my reaction to your proposition does not constitute redefining the word.
Yes. I wish it. The two of us cannot, by ourselves, end the thread, but we can reduce the number of participants by two. I'm done. The last word can be somebody else's. Received on Mon Jul 02 2007 - 12:25:52 CEST