Which do you want to know about - the internalizing it or sharing it? And of course, since we don't have it (as noted earlier by Mr Shirley (aka former garage door operator of building 7), anything internalized is suspect anyway right?
A perfectionist would say that the information should be purged, although I shudder at the thought of what that would mean if it's in my head :)
I have no problem sharing that type of information with anyone that would listen and could stay awake long enough to get into the second sentence. Others can go read about it.
On 10/5/06, Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OT still
The next version of Sharepoint includes wikis and blogs
.. how many are internalizing all this good AD/ESE/Jetblue stuff in your
own internal orgs and wiki/blogging/podcasting this stuff internally?
Al Mulnick wrote:
> Sure, but is that because the common wisdom is wrong or is it because
> there is not a definitive source of truthful information (such as
> decent documentation?)
>
> Could it be that a wiki is as good as it gets? Or could there be blog
> entries that would give better information? Or perhaps accurate
> documentation on some vendor website waiting to be read and understood?
>
> Philosophical questions such as these can keep you up late at night
> you know. (-;
>
>
>
> On 10/5/06, *Brett Shirley* < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> Except when 99% of the common wisdom about something is wrong,
> like in the
> case of ESE / JET Blue ... ;-)
>
> Cheers,
> -BrettSh
>
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Greg Nims wrote:
>
> >
> > > It's funny how we quote wikis as definitive sources of
> information, when
> > > they can be edited by anyone and everyone :)
> > >
> > > Who vets the edits and how much does that person know about
> the subject
> > > matter??
> >
> > Anyone can edit, which is why they are generally correct. When
> 100,000
> > people view a record, and 2 people want to change it to be
> incorrect,
> > 999,998 will want to correct it.
> >
> > I wouldn't use a wiki as a great historical or technical
> source. But for
> > encyclopedia entries, which give a good summation of a subject,
> they are
> > great.
> >
> >
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> <http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx>
> > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx
> >
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> <http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx>
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx
>
>
--
Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
http://www.threatcode.com
If you are a SBSer and you don't subscribe to the SBS Blog... man ... I will hunt you down...
http://blogs.technet.com/sbs
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx
