Re: Looking for Statspack documentation

From: Howard J. Rogers <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 09:24:24 +1100
Message-Id: <pan.2003.02.10.22.24.24.74202@yahoo.com.au>

On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 21:26:20 +1100, Howard J. Rogers wrote:

> Niall Litchfield wrote:

>> "Ryan Gaffuri" <rgaffuri_at_cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:1efdad5b.0302060916.354b850d_at_posting.google.com...
>> 
>>>So I take it anytime I see something by Niemic, I should take it with
>>>a grain of salt. Alot of people hate his performance tuning book and
>>>now that I have read several others I see the weaknesses.

[snip]

> Excellent advice, Niall as ever.
>
> But Niemic's stuff is still almost always bad. :-)
>
> Regards
> HJR
At this point, I'd like to mention that in response to the above comment (all one sentence of it), I received the following email from said Richard Niemic:

Quote on

From: "Niemiec Rich - IL" <NIEMIECR_at_Tusc.com> To: howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au
Subject: back up your statements
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:06:55 -0600

If you have questions, ask me directly so that I can answer them before you post slanderous statements on the web. I spend a lot of nights, weekends...etc. writing things with the only goal to try and help people out, so I am honestly concerned with your comments.

What are things that you've read? What do you find bad with them? Do you ever try to get clarification before you post things like this?

Thanks,
Rich Niemiec

Quote Off

Now I could comment on the arrogance that suggests I can't post an opinion without having it cleared (or 'clarified') by Rich first. I could also suggest that throwing words like 'slanderous' around is designed to initmidate (and my inbox tells me that it has worked on at least one occasion). But I won't mention that Usenet and the Web are two completely different beasts.

And I would also say that if I'd had the courtesy of a reply from Rich to *my* reply to his original email, I wouldn't be posting this here.

But I haven't, so I will.

Other posters have to know that its OK to think Rich is wrong, or think that his books miss the point by a long mile. Big names and publisher's advances shouldn't mean he gets to preview thoughts before they are posted here. TUSC might employ lots of people, but that shouldn't make his opinions Gospel or beyond criticism.

And if he doesn't like the opinions expressed here, or can't tell the difference between a poor opinion and a 'slanderous statement', he can do what we all have to do here when criticised: grow up, deal with it and move on.

'Nuff said
HJR Received on Mon Feb 10 2003 - 16:24:24 CST