No, it was in the original printed copy. Pretty obvious. (Of course, I
know who he is, being a member of the DFWCFUG)
-Billy
Stephen M Aylor wrote:
>
> Whats all the fuss? Its not as if the article I read contained any secrets.
> Here's the last paragraph I read ... maybe Im late to the thrash party but
> whats the biggie here ......
>
> About the Author
> Patrick Steil is president and chief technology officer of Infrastructure
> Inc., a Texas-based software development company. As cochairman of the DFW
> ColdFusion User Group, he's very involved with the ColdFusion development
> community. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Was this added AFTER the complaints? Guess Im missing it.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Fusebox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 6:40 PM
> Subject: Re: arguments **against** fusebox
>
> > .... and I've sent a copy out of fairness to the author...
> > Mr. Patrick Steil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > article in question:
> > http://www.sys-con.com/coldfusion/archives/0211/steil/index.html.
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Hal Helms" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Fusebox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:17 PM
> > Subject: RE: arguments **against** fusebox
> >
> >
> > > What would be REALLY helpful is to let CFDJ know how you all feel. Alan
> is
> > > right--there's no conspiracy going on; just a desire to fill pages. What
> > > they did isn't defensible, but the only way they'll know is if people
> let
> > > them know what they like and what they don't like. Honestly, you'd be
> > > shocked how much of an impact even a single email has. I'll make it even
> > > easier: the email is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Seriously, the only outside
> > feedback
> > > they get is from people who care enough to email them and it is taken
> very
> > > seriously. (In fact, you could even put in a plug for your favorite
> > > col...;-)
> > >
> > > Hal Helms
> > > == See www.ColdFusionTraining.com for info on "Best Practices with
> > > ColdFusion & Fusebox" training, Jan 22-25 ==
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 6:59 PM
> > > To: Fusebox
> > > Subject: RE: arguments **against** fusebox
> > >
> > >
> > > I read that article a few weeks ago and didn't realize that the writer
> had
> > > an interest in the product that got the most favorable reviews. I
> > > subsequently went and signed up for the trial.
> > >
> > > Now that I've read this thread, I would have to agree, as a reader who
> has
> > > been deceived by CFDJ and Infrastructure Inc., I would have to agree
> that
> > > their practices are very questionable.
> > >
> > > Benjamin S. Rogers
> > > Web Developer, c4.net
> > > voice: (508) 240-0051
> > > fax: (508) 240-0057
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: McCollough, Alan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 11:59 AM
> > > To: Fusebox
> > > Subject: RE: arguments **against** fusebox
> > >
> > >
> > > Okay, I've written for CFDJ, and plan to do so in the future, but I also
> > > have a long history in the publishing industry. Here is my slant on the
> > > whole issue
> > >
> > >
> > > CFDJ is but one of a family of publications put out by SYS-CON
> publishing.
> > > The actual page assembly itself is done by folks who apparently work on
> > > Macs, using QuarkXPress. This isn't bad a'tall, actually its great from
> an
> > > electronic pre-press standpoint. BuTtTtTt, do remember, their primary
> > > business is SELLING ADVERTISING and SELLING SUBSCRIPTIONS. That's where
> > the
> > > rubber meets the road.
> > >
> > > Now, you cannot sell advertising unless you have readers. You cannot
> > attract
> > > readers unless you have articles to for the readers to read. Their
> entire
> > > biosphere consists of subscribers and advertisers, with money being the
> > > oxygen that drives the whole thing. Articles are what they need to pry
> > money
> > > out of reader's pockets. Lots of articles. Ask somebody who writes on a
> > > regular basis, such as Hal, and I'm sure he'll tell you it takes a lotta
> > > time to write a good article, and you come nowhere near recovering your
> > > expenses on what you receive as payment.
> > >
> > > As a magazine editor, you need, desperately need, new articles for each
> > > issue, and not just new articles, but new articles on whatever the 'hot'
> > > topic of the month is. Therefore, if somebody totally unfamiliar to the
> > > Fusebox ship of fools does a lame-o review of the Fusebox Methodology
> > book,
> > > as far as the editor is concerned, that's another page of print taken
> care
> > > of.
> > >
> > > CFDJ is not a million-subscriber publication that is gonna have a staff
> of
> > > editorial reviewers. There are -not- going to be investigative phone
> > calls,
> > > gumshoe detective work, or down-in-the-trenches street journalism work
> > being
> > > done. Its gonna be a "Here's an article. Is it ok? Good! Print it!"
> > > operation.
> > >
> > > I don't say that as a slam against CFDJ, cuz' if I was operating the
> place
> > > it would probably be the same.
> > >
> > > So what to do? Use this to your advantage!
> > >
> > > Fuseboxers, unite and start writing a slew of articles! Create code
> snips
> > > that are Fuseboxed! Write reviews of products and describe how they
> > > integrate into Fusebox! Basically, let's turn CFDJ into FBDJ!
> > >
> > >
> > > Alan McCollough
> > > Web Programmer
> > > Allaire Certified ColdFusion Developer
> > > Alaska Native Medical Center
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 2:23 PM
> > > > To: Fusebox
> > > > Subject: Re: arguments **against** fusebox
> > > >
> > > > I can't bite my tongue any longer. CFDJ has for several months been
> > > > pushing
> > > > the limits when it comes to journalism ethics. Having the a writer
> who's
> > > > financially invested in one of several products he's reviewing is
> highly
> > > > questionable and at least just looks really bad, now matter how well
> > it's
> > > > done. Then to throw in a FREE methodology into a comparison of NOT
> FREE
> > > > products, slam it on false facts, is all together incredible.
> > > >
> > > > Just my two cents.
> > > >
> > > > Rick
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
