Re: Free database tools announcements - invitation to discussion

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> schreef in bericht news:1087953603.955453_at_yasure...
> Jeroen van den Broek wrote:
>
> > "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> schreef in bericht
> > news:1087912728.412146_at_yasure...
> >
> >>the spammers have won :-( wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Daniel Morgan wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>the spammers have won :-( wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Daniel Morgan wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>jhking wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Daniel,
> >>>>>I don't understand. If you agree with jhking's interpretation of
> >>>>>this group's charter,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I did not agree with his interpretation.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I still don't understand. You totally ignored all of jhking's
> >>>references to (and excerpts from) this group's charter. Since
> >>>you didn't refute his interpretation, that implies that you
> >>>agree with it. So my question remains (unanswered): if you
> >>>(and the vast majority of regulars) disagree with this group's
> >>>charter, why were you not successful in getting the charter
> >>>modified? Or do you simply prefer (and enjoy?) chastizing people
> >>>who don't do things the way you would like them to be done?
> >>>
> >>>Good Luck,
> >>>Avi.
> >>
> >>They have been brought up numerous times and dealt with in the
> >>c.d.o. groups. I saw no reason to rehash that which had already
> >>been dealt with.
> >>
> >>I enjoy the group as a place where members of a community, those
> >>using Oracle Corp. tools, can exchange information and help each
> >>other. I don't enjoy seeing personal greed by persons promoting
> >>an agenda taking advantage of the fact that there isn't a cop
> >>guarding the door.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Daniel,
> >
> > as you only want to allow Oracle Corp. tools, why is it that the regular
> > posters (including yourself) do answer questions regarding TOAD, which
isn't
> > an Oracle tool and isn't even free either?
> > I see your point in trying to keep out real spammers, but referring
every
> > single post containing a reference to a non-Oracle product to c.d.o.m.
will
> > not keep them away, imho.
>
> I agree. But if we don't fight for something we abandon all hope.
>
> So here's my challenge. If we open it up to ALL tool vendors then
> I presume you have no objection to IBM, Microsoft, Sybase, Computer
> Associates, BMC, Quest, etc. using our forum to support their products
> too? Is that correct?
>
> How about Business Objects and Crystal Reports
> How about Brio and Cognos
> How about ... need I go on?
>
> You can't write a rule that says big commercial companies excluded.
>

You don't have to challenge me, I actually mostly agree with you: .misc/.server/.tools should only be used for TECHNICAL questions/discussions, not for anouncements/advertising. I would only choose another strategy to minimize non-complying posts: 1. First, ask such a poster politely to leave and refer to the appropriate alternative.
2. If after that he still doesn't get it, maybe explain him once more. 3. After that, just ignore him, like you probably would with 'real' spammers (the ones that have nothing to do with Oracle).

My other point was, that I don't see why you should distinguish between Oracle Corp. tools and 3th party tools (that's why I asked about Toad). As long as it is a technical question, I don't see much reason to disallow [Quoted] [Quoted] it, but a new group c.d.o.third-party.tools would also be fine with me.

Cheers.

> --
> Daniel Morgan
> http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
> http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
>
Received on Thu Jun 24 2004 - 23:08:05 CEST