We blame you for having the balls to even dream of asking for assistance on a list where 90-100% of the Exchange MVP's reside after bashing them many times over... Get over yourself.
-----Original Message----- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics I HAVE tried to let it rest. Ed brought up this whole topic from a message posted as "Migrating from GroupWise 6.5". Don't blame me for bringing the topic up because I DIDN'T BRING THE TOPIC UP. And no, I never said that MVP's would cause the demise of the computer industry. What I said was, today we have a choice to either regulate ourselves or to wait for government to regulate us. That is what I said. I am more than happy to wait around for government to regulate us, that's why I don't bring up this whole "ethics" discussion. The computer industry is not going away, it will simply be more regulated. If we do it ourselves, we have a say in those regulations. If we do not, then government gets to have that say. > Then you live your ethics, and let the rest of us live ours. Then, > when the IT industry goes to hell in a handbasket, you can blame us > all for it's demise. We (speaking collectively here) don't believe > that MVP's are unethical for receiving a small stipend or gift > (whatever it might be). You do. That's fine, but stop trying to > force it upon the rest of us. Our views aren't going to change, and > your views aren't going to change, so let it rest.=20 > > > Ben Winzenz > Network Engineer > Gardner & White > (317) 581-1580 ext 418 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, > December 22, 2003 12:24 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) > Conversation: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > > > I got to the first paragraph in your post and pretty much quit > reading.=20 > > I do not claim that all MVP's are Microsoft wh0res. I simply don't > claim that. In fact, I have posted things in direct opposition to that claim. > If you are going to make such blatant mis-characterizations, then I am > not going to respond to the rest of your post, which I can only assume > you will then take as "proof" that you are right or that I "cannot > make rational arguments" or whatever other non-sense you want to claim. > > "Ethical god"? Please. I have, nor ever will claim to be an "ethical > god". > I have my set of ethics that I follow, period. And I did not bring up > this whole point of ethics on this list. I posted an email about > "Migrating from GroupWise 6.5" that then degenerated into this mess. > Thank your buddy Ed for that. > > And about this claim that I am not following my own ethical guidelines. > Hey, there may be some truth to it. I haven't seen any proof from what > miserable evidence you have supplied, but I am more than willing to > admit that I may not live up to every single bit of the ethical code > that I have. Know what? It doesn't matter. An ethical code is the > ceiling, it is what everyone should aspire to, but it is not expected > that everyone will ALWAYS actually achieve every single little detail. > That's not what ethics is about. The laws are the floor, the ethical > code the ceiling, aspire to get as close to the ceiling as possible. > All I can say is that I try my absolute hardest, every day, to meet my > own ethical standards. Do I succeed every day? No, but I TRY. > > Finally, just because the officer that tickets you for speeding > murdered his wife last night doesn't mean that you DIDN'T break the > law for speeding. > > > > I have no credibility because I don't say BOO? Ok then...BOO =20 > >Do I get credibility now? > >=20 > > In all seriousness, I'm not the one who claims that all MVP's are=20 > >Microsoft Whores or that MVP's are doing anything wrong in their > world. > > Since, you are the one that brought up the point of ethics, I > >assumed=20 it was you that were claiming to be the "ethical god" > >here. Perhaps=20 your pointing out that you don't accept gifts > >because of your ethics=20 was where I went astray. > >=20 > > As for the litmus test you are under, I suggest you read your own=20 > >website. YOU are working for that company, and YOU are the one > >that=20 should be upholding ALL the virtues of that company, not me, > >not ED,=20 not TONY, heck, not even DON; only you! You don't like > >what your=20 company puts up as a litmus test, then I suggest you > >find a job > elsewhere. > >=20 > > One thing still stands, you still aren't drumming up business in > >this=20 list when you "explode" on potential customers. I hope you > >never=20 decide to come calling on my account, I'm sure your boss > >would like to > > > know the reason I refused you a meeting was because you don't > >know=20 when to shut up. > >=20 > > As for the name-calling that goes on this list, I suggest you shut > >up, > > > sit back, and learn. Sure, Ed, Tony, and Don (and a few more) > > can=20 certainly be grating on someone's nerves, but I will promise > > you, they > > > know more about Exchange Systems then you could wish to know in a=20 > > lifetime. While I don't choose to instruct in the same way these=20 > > people do, I certainly understand where they get to the point and > > call > > > someone an idiot for not looking up an issue like "How do I turn on > > my > computer" > > before posting it to the list. > >=20 > > Remember, the people on this list are under ZERO obligation to > >help=20 you, or anyone else. When they do choose to help, they can > >save your=20 butt more times then not. But they WILL NOT, nor > >should the be=20 expected to, put up with damn fools that ask a > >question that would be=20 answered faster if that person would have > >taken the time to research=20 the question themselves. > >=20 > > Sure, I don't like being called Lazy, but I promise, it took only > >once > > > from ED to make me understand that I better research the hell out > >of=20 something before I bring it here. Even then, I don't expect > >Ed, or=20 the rest, to be nice when it's a stupid ass mistake I made > >myself and=20 have no one to blame but myself. > >=20 > > You don't like the people in this list, change to a different list. > >=20 But don't complain about the free service you get here, just > >because=20 you don't like it when someone calls you a stupid fool > >for not doing=20 your homework before you got here. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Bob Sadler > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 10:51 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics =20 =20 > >First, you have no credibility on the point. You find the phrase > >"I=20 finish them (fights)" offensive but not someone being called a > >"liar", > > > "stupid", "idiot", "wife beater". You simply have zaro credibility. > >=20 > > Second, as for your other two points, our customers and potential=20 > >customers are made well aware of any and all potential conflicts > >of=20 interest. We practice full disclosure. In addition, meeting > >with a=20 vendor to talk about their new products is in no way even > >CLOSE to=20 accepting a title or gift from said vendor. But, there > >is no point to=20 even debating this with you because you are never > >going to see it=20 because you are going to deny the obvious. Yes, I > >have to deal with=20 vendors just like everyone else in this > >industry. It is a fact of > life. > > But, I don't have to like it and no, generally, I almost NEVER > > meet=20 with vendors and when I do, it is for specific purposes, I > > get in, get > > > the information and get out. > >=20 > > Finally, you have obviously shown your bias by claiming that I > >claim=20 to be the "all ethical" sort. And to my knowledge, I have > >no "ethics > test" > > that I have created. This is a blatant mis-characterization and=20 > > exposes your bias. I am not, nor ever will be "all ethical" and=20 > > "holier than thou". I have *different* ethics apparently than many > > on=20 this board, but I have never claimed to be perfect or that my > > ethics=20 are the end all, be all. Yes, I have paid to attend > > conventions, I=20 have paid to be a Microsoft "partner". In some > > strict ethical vaccuum=20 those may be considered unethical, but > > this is the real world. And=20 besides that, there is a clear, > > bright line between paying a vendor to > > > attend a convention and accepting a pure gift from a vendor. That=20 > > bright line is what I have been talking about, but you are never > > going > > > to see it because you will never admit to the obvious and just want > > to > > > pick a fight. > >=20 > > And yes, for all of you out there, I am nearly certain that, in > >my=20 youth, I accepted direct gifts from vendors. I cannot recall > >any=20 particular occassion, but I'm willing to bet that it probably > occurred. > > And guess what? I stopped that long, long, long ago because IT IS > WRONG. > >=20 > > So, to sum it up, you have no credibility that you have been > "offended" > > in any way because there have been lots more offensive stuff said > > that > > > you have not said boo about. And, you are in self-denial about > >the=20 DISTINCT difference between accepting a pure gift from a > >vendor and=20 PAYING that vendor to attend a convention, etc. Here's > >a hint. One=20 costs you money, the other doesn't. > >=20 > > > I am not "quibbling" with what you said, I'm instead taking > > > offense=20 at > >=20 > > > what you said. You see, you can't claim to be the "all > > >ethical"=20 sort=3D20 you want, if you can't even pass the ethics > > >test of your = > own > > > >making. =3D20 I didn't post any of those points on your > > >website,=20 someone from YOUR=3D20 company did, and you are the > > >one claiming to > hold them near and dear. > > >=3D20 > > > How interesting that you choose to respond ONLY to one point, > > >and=20 then > >=20 > > > make irrelevant statements about people calling you names. > > >=3D20 > > > Since I didn't call you names sir, perhaps you should go back = > and=3D20 > > > >re-read the whole message. It's not that I consider you a liar,=20 > > >or=3D20 that you are stupid. I now consider you incapable of > > >having = > > > >any type=3D20 of intelligent discussion based on the fact that > > >you=20 choose to ignore=3D20 2/3rds of what was posted, or should > > >I just=20 assume that you chose not=3D20 to discuss those points > > >because you=20 couldn't keep your "I have my=3D20 Ethics" argument > > >and all this = > would > be moot? > > >=3D20 > > > Speaking of MOOT, can anyone tell me what top 10 classic rock=20 > > >single=3D20 contains the word "MOOT"? > > >=3D20 > > >=3D20 > > >=3D20 > > > Bob Sadler > > >=3D20 > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 9:50 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics =3D20 > > >=3D20 = > So=20 > > >you are going to quibble with things that "I" said? You people = > are=3D20 > > > >so whacked out that it is utterly incomprehensible. So where > > >were=20 you=3D20 when I was called a "liar" or a "wife beater" or > > >"stupid" = > or=20 > > >"idiot"=3D20 or that I "starve children". All of that is OK in > > >your=20 whacky bizarro=3D20 world, but explaining to someone that > > >if you = > start > > > >a fight (in email=3D20 for Christ's > > > sake) that I will finish that fight. Oh that is TERRIBLE! How > > >could > > you > > > SAY such a thing. Never mind the "liar", "stupid", "idiot" stuff, > > THAT, > > > sir, is uncalled for. > > >=3D20 > > > Bob, you amaze me. > > >=3D20 > > > > You know, I'm just as happy to NOT read this dribble, but = > when=3D20=20 > > > > someone > > >=3D20 > > > > points out so wonderfully how ethical they are, and we can > > > > all=20 go=3D20 to=3D3D20 www.infonition.com/ethics.shtml to > > > > prove it, = > then=20 > > > > someone =3D > > like > >=20 > > > > me just > > >=3D20 > > > > might go there and read, and low and behold what is it we find? > > > > = > =3D > > =3D3D20 > > > > Well, this character Greg, wants us all to believe his "ethics" > > are=3D3D20 > > > > without question. So, let's take a look at his ethics page and > > see=3D3D20 > > > > what he's supposed to be doing. > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > First, Greg's point of vendor conflict is answered here: > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > To never accept compensation from vendors for recommending =3D3D > > > products=3D3D3D20 > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > One must ask then Greg, have you ever been to a seminar,=3D20=20 > > > >conference,=3D3D20 or LUNCH where the vendor presenting paid > > > >for=20 the=3D20 meal, the snacks,=3D3D20 the coffee? =3D3D20 > > > >Second, = > Greg's=20 > > > >list of ethics claim: > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > To disclose any and all influences that may affect our=3D3D20 > > > >=20 recommendations=3D3D3D20 =3D3D20 Greg, does this mean that > > > >if I = > were=20 > > > >to speak to you over the > > phone,=3D3D20 > > > > you would tell me just how many times your Cisco, Microsoft, =3D > > Bay=3D3D20 > > > > Networks, etc., Rep. has called? Or are you saying that you > > never=3D3D20 > > > > meet with the vendors to discuss how their products can benefit > > your=3D3D20 > > > > customers? Do you ever read trade magazines that discuss the > > > > use > > of=3D3D20 > > > > one vendors products over another? Will you then tell me all > > > > =3D > > the=3D3D20 > > > > magazines you read, what date, publication, page number, etc? > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > Third, Greg's list goes on to say: > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > To be fair and accurate when resolving disputes, problems or > > issues=3D3D20 > > > > [and] To conduct ourselves in a professional manner at all > > times=3D3D3D20 > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > One must ask then Greg, exactly how does your statement of: > > "Wrong.=3D3D20 > > > > You brought it up by throwing stones my way. I don't pick > > > > fights, > > I=3D3D20 > > > > finish them." work into these statements? > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > This is just what I don't need in a vendor. Someone who > > > >believes > > he's > > >=3D20 > > > > always right, and if he is going to have a fight with > > > >his=3D20=20 customers,=3D3D20 HE'S going to finish it. I can > > > >see now why=20 people=3D20 flock to your=3D3D20 organization > > > >Greg. =3D3D20 The = > point=20 > > > >is, don't say something matters a great deal to you, > > and=3D3D20 > > > > then give this list plenty of examples showing that apparently > > > > =3D > > it=3D3D20 > > > > doesn't. You want to wave a flag around and say "I have ethics" > > and=3D3D20 > > > > yet not live by those same ethics, then be prepared to be > > inundated=3D3D20 > > > > with the onslaught. > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > I would trust Ed, Tom, Tony, and even Don, further then I would > > trust=3D3D20 > > > > someone yelling about how ethical they are and at the same time > > say=3D3D20 > > > > they'll finish any fight. > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > It's time to throttle back now greg, and realize this. You are > > > >= > =3D > > a=3D3D20 > > > > Sales Manager for a company that apparently you are supposed to > > be=3D3D20 > > > > drumming up business for. Just how much business do you think > > you=3D3D20 > > > > have generated on this list after acting in the manner you did? > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > Bob Sadler > > > >=3D3D20 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >=3D20 > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > Web Interface:=3D20 > > > =3D > > = > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3D3D3Dexchange&tex > t_ > > mo > > > de=3D3D3D=3D3D > > > & > > > lang=3D3D3Denglish > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >=20 > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Web Interface: > > = > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3D3Dexchange&text_ > mo > > de=3D3D=3D > > & > > lang=3D3Denglish > > 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=3Dexchange&text_mo > de=3D= > & > lang=3Denglish > 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] _________________________________________________________________ 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]
