This is the BEST group, ever. I don't have to watch the soaps. All I've got to do is read this list!
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Migrating from GroupWise 6.5 What was it then, a compliment? You cannot even be honest in your criticism. And ethics are not passed as laws. There is no law that a company's employees cannot accept gifts. The ethics that lawyers and doctors follow are also not laws. This discussion is about the IT industry, as a whole or in part, deciding what is and is not ethical. We, as an industry, do that, not a legislative body. Look, it is obvious that you are discussing something that you have not bothered educate yourself on, are not being honest in your criticism, have nothing to say and simply want to argue for the sake of arguing. So, that being said, yes, you are brilliant and you win. Happy? > Oh, that was not a personal attack... And I don't lose arguments... > > I tell ya what. You find me the documentation to support your claim > for our industry and I might be inclined to believe you. I'll need > actual laws passed by Federal/Local Governments or a consortium of > some kind AND any cases that were brought to trial on this subject. > Please provide these details in a time stamped format so I can see at > what point in time these laws went into effect... > > There ARE laws on the books regarding this perceived ethical > violation, right? > > Everyone should probably cease assisting you with your Groupwise > migration since it might get those of us who are not MVP's nominated > for such things and it would be unethical of us to assist you. So, > please stop asking for help as the answers we provide will be > unethical in nature... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:34 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Migrating from GroupWise 6.5 > > Personal attacks are generally the clearest sign that someone has lost > an argument and has nothing better to say. So now I am a wife beater, > a liar, I starve children and I get beat up a lot. I keep learning > things about myself that I never knew before, I love this list. > > > You got beat up a lot in High School didn't you... You should have > > asked them (while being beaten to a pulp) to leave you some brain > > cells to operate with... > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:20 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Migrating from GroupWise 6.5 > > > > Titles are priceless. > > > > Ethics are about avoiding real and *perceived* conflicts of > > interest. If you work in an industry and accept gifts from vendors > > in that industry, it is always going to at least be a perceived > > conflict of interest. Whether it actually is or not is absolutely > > irrelevant. If you own your own business and provide consulting on > > how to build bridges, then no, an MVP title would not be a real or > > perceived conflict > of interest. If you are in IT, it is. > > > > > > > Kindly define "significant gifts such as large dollar items and > > > titles". Where, exactly is your threshold? Let's get down to > > > specifics, Greg. > > > > > > How is it a conflict of interest when it is my job to provide > > > consulting services surrounding Microsoft products? It is not my > > > job, for example, to steer people away from Windows to Linux. > > > > > > Why can one not serve two masters, particularly if the two > > > masters' directions are complementary? Still, your entire point > > > is flawed since neither Microsoft nor the MVP program is my > > > master, and neither ask anything of me, period. (I take that > > > back--they do ask one thing, that we behave in the forums. If you > > > claim that's a conflict of interest, it will further confirm my > > > belief that you've lost it.) The MVP award is a "thank you", if > > > you will, for past service. Not once has anyone directed me to do > > > a single thing. > > > > > > Again, for 11,000,001st time, you have failed to adequately > > > explain how there is any conflict of interest between my being an > > > MVP and what my employer asks me to do. Microsoft gives MVPs a > > > modest non-monetary award for their work doing peer support. It's > > > right there, disclosed in the MVP website, as I told you before. > > > Personally, I provide this peer support service on my own personal > > > time, not my employer's, and of my > > own free will. > > > My employer pays me to perform consulting on Microsoft Exchange, > > > Windows and various other complementary technologies to its customers. > > > Most other MVPs are either consultants or Exchange administrators. > > > We answer technical questions and try to help people with their > > > technical problems. We do not sell Microsoft products. Whatever we > > > say we believe. Where is the conflict of interest, pray tell? > > > > > > I cannot recall ever having been encouraged to evangelize > > > Microsoft's products because I am an MVP. Personally, I don't > > > hesitate to express my opinions about Exchange even if the good > > > folks at Microsoft disagree with me. Many others who have been MVPs > > > longer that I are even > > more forthcoming. > > > Please demonstrate exactly what the conflict of interest is and > > > its insidious result, Mr. Deckler. How, exactly, has the MVP > > > program caused such an ethical dilemma that you must rant and rave > > > over it? Let's get specific, though, because your 50,000-foot view > > > is rather > > unconvincing. > > > > > > For the record, my employer knows I am an MVP, knows that I > > > receive a modest gift of appreciation, and has no problem with > > > this. So my employer, which happens to be a very ethical company, > > > has no problem with > > this arrangement. > > > Why should you? > > > > > > It is mighty judgmental of you to presume that any person is > > > unprofessional solely because he does not adhere to your personal > > standards of ethics. > > > Your opinion implies that because you define there to be a > > > conflict of interest, no reasonable person can decide for himself > > > to the > contrary. > > > That is, you see yourself as the sole arbiter of professional > > > ethics in this field. Clearly you believe that MVPs are > > > unprofessional because they do not adhere to your standards of > > > ethics, even if those standards are undefined and based solely > > > upon your own simplistic idea of standards, your own ignorance, > > > your logical fallacies, and your personal prejudices. As long as > > > you espouse such ridiculous ideas, I will > > call you on them. > > > > > > You've been spewing this bile for eight years and you know you're > > > right because, to paraphrase, nobody has proven you wrong. The real > > > problem is that you haven't convinced anyone other than yourself > > > that > > you're right. > > > You are the one with the opinions. But wait--you say you deal in > > > facts. In an eariler post, you state that it should be obvious that > > > everything you say is your opinion. Which is it, fact or opinion? > > > Well, I will argue that you don't deal in facts, you're all about > > > opinion, so don't go claiming it's all about "known facts". There > > > isn't a single fact in your diatribe except for those that say or > > > imply, "I believe...". I do agree that it's a fact that you believe > > > some > > ridiculous point. > > > > > > People do read what you say in your posts, as opposed to reading > > > what they read. Everyone recognizes that you are speaking with your > > > own voice. It's obvious to all that you really believe what you say > > > and have a firm conviction. That's how they know for certain that > > > you're a > > bag of gas. > > > > > > As to this thread being a waste of bytes, it has been your choice > > > to continue it. It seems hypocritical that you post a complaint > > > that everyone else is wasting their time and bandwidth, when you > > > yourself are guilty of just that by posting such messages. > > > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > > > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Web Interface: > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode > =&lang > =english > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ********************************************************************* Note: This E-mail and any attachments may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this E-mail and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and deleting it from your computer system. Thank you for your cooperation. ********************************************************************** _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
