> You can tell people why they shouldn't feel a certain way, but
> preventing them from expressing their feelings is usually a bad thing,
> unless their expression is hurting other people. (Hurting my feelings
> is OK.)
>
> I usually sit back until everyone's cards/feelings are on the table, an
I wanted to comment on how we handled this article.
Seems the author did not understand the company/open-source
relationship. This is not a huge surprise. I have to explain it to my
friends and relatives all the time. Now, our way of dealing with users
who ask questions is to gently lead them
the thing that pissed me off the most, and set me off, was the totally
blatant errors ... we've had other articles written, with a GB slant to
them, that didn't get my feathers in a ruffle ... the fact that they
*talked* with GB, got quotes from them and some of their partners, and
*still* got th
>
> Here's my response to the inaccurate article cmp produced. After
> chatting with Marc I decided to post it myself.
>
> Since I know Ned reads this list, I formally request that he also
> insists PUBLICALLY that cmp correct their inaccuracies. I'm rather
> disappointed (for lack of a more d
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 11:44:48AM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Nathan Myers wrote:
>
> > This is probably a good time to point out that this is the _worst_
> > _possible_ response to erroneous reportage. The perception by readers
> > will not be that the reporter faile
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Not that it shouldn't be fixed. I just don't get worked up over it.
Well, in a way I regret bringing it to the attention of the community --
just in a small way.
But at the same time I realized that I was not the right one at that
time to craft a reply -- after all, I'm a
> > It will be harder than the original mailings, but I urge each who
> > wrote to write again and apologize for attacking her.
>
> In a way, I think you are right .. I think the attack was aimed at the
> wrong ppl :( She obviously didn't get *any* of her information from ppl
> that belong *in*
>
> Here's my response to the inaccurate article cmp produced. After
> chatting with Marc I decided to post it myself.
>
> Since I know Ned reads this list, I formally request that he also
> insists PUBLICALLY that cmp correct their inaccuracies. I'm rather
> disappointed (for lack of a more d
>
> Here's my response to the inaccurate article cmp produced. After
> chatting with Marc I decided to post it myself.
>
> Since I know Ned reads this list, I formally request that he also
> insists PUBLICALLY that cmp correct their inaccuracies. I'm rather
> disappointed (for lack of a more d
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001, Nathan Myers wrote:
> This is probably a good time to point out that this is the _worst_
> _possible_ response to erroneous reportage. The perception by readers
> will not be that the reporter failed, but that PostgreSQL advocates
> are rabid weasels who don't appreciate fav
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 01:17:15AM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> Here's my response to the inaccurate article cmp produced. After
> chatting with Marc I decided to post it myself.
> ...
> Where do you get your info? Do you just make it up? PostgreSQL is
> not a product of Great Bridge and
Here's my response to the inaccurate article cmp produced. After
chatting with Marc I decided to post it myself.
Since I know Ned reads this list, I formally request that he also
insists PUBLICALLY that cmp correct their inaccuracies. I'm rather
disappointed (for lack of a more descriptive wor
12 matches
Mail list logo
