> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:23:11 am Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > It's not like they *need* to stick their head in the lion's mouth.
>
> Well, actually, if Microsoft want to be taken seriously in the Open
> Source community, they do.
Yeah, this is true -- I think some folks within Microsoft been attempt
Hello,
> > The professionals (journalists, negotiators, lawyers) spend years
> > learning and honing their skills, just as we spend years improving ours.
> > We're likely to do about as well conducting a potentially hostile
> > interview as a lawyer or journalist writing a subtle piece of code - n
> > The venue is unlikely to provoke a PR earthquake for anyone involved.
>
> Agreed. Though if we could swing it, it'd be neat :-)
Wow. So, you'd like to be as grubby as you've suggested they are? Classy.
- Jeff
--
GNOME.conf.au 2008: Melbourne, Australia http://live.gnome.org/Melbourne2008
Hello,
> > When engaging an opponent who is cunning
...
> > it behooves one to proceed with caution.
Jeff Waugh:
> OK: Let's wear floaties! Seriously, it's a few Microsoft people at a LUG.
> It is not national television. About the worst that could happen is that
> some press dude comes along and
On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 04:50:10PM +1000, Daniel Mons wrote:
> Do we have names and/or job descriptions of the Microsoft employees in
> question?
>
> The wiki says:
> "There’s a strong chance that we can have some fairly senior Microsoft
> Australia representatives at a SLUG meeting (likely Januar
Hello,
> > "A Microsoft partner is a victim they haven't got to yet."
...
Sridhar Dhanapalan:
> You're reading far too much into this. This is a one-off meeting. It is not
> another MS-Novell deal, and we sure as heck aren't making a human pretzel.
I hope so.
> At the very least, this is an opp
Hello,
Jeff Waugh:
> Here's an idea: Engage!
When engaging an opponent who is cunning, powerful, ruthless, opportunistic,
predatory and with a history of misleading, dishonest and even outright
illegal behaviour, including turning on those it previously led to believe
were its partners, it beh
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Jiri Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In addition, if the speakers are taking questions directly from the floor,
> they are effectively the moderator of the discussion and thereby in
> control. This seems to be common at LUG meetings and works reasonably well
> for the kinds o
> > > If so, perhaps professionals should be asking the questions and
> > > follow-up questions, not random geeks.
>
> > Oh. Real nice. To both the professionals *and* geeks who go to LUG
> > events.
>
> The professionals (journalists, negotiators, lawyers) spend years learning
> and honing the
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Daniel Mons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do we have names and/or job descriptions of the Microsoft employees in
> question?
>
> The wiki says:
> "There’s a strong chance that we can have some fairly senior Microsoft
> Australia representatives at a SLUG meeting (likely January
> Do we have names and/or job descriptions of the Microsoft employees in
> question?
Sam Ramji was going to be there (and at linux.conf.au), but unfortunately he
couldn't come out to Australia for whatever reason.
> I personally have strong interests in virtualisation and both high
> availabili
Do we have names and/or job descriptions of the Microsoft employees in
question?
The wiki says:
"There’s a strong chance that we can have some fairly senior Microsoft
Australia representatives at a SLUG meeting (likely January 2008). One
shall be a business person, the others are engineers."
Give
> When engaging an opponent who is cunning
8< snip 8<
> it behooves one to proceed with caution.
OK: Let's wear floaties! Seriously, it's a few Microsoft people at a LUG. It
is not national television. About the worst that could happen is that some
press dude comes along and says "Wow, those f
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, "Brent Wallis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jan 12, 2008 10:47 PM, Sridhar Dhanapalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Jan 2008, "Brent Wallis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > K...so they asked to come along or did someone invite them?
> >
> > They offered,
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Jiri Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Brent Wallis:
> > The big 2 questions I have in my head is "why" this MS visit, and,
> > what the SLUG and MS want to get out of it.
>
> "A Microsoft partner is a victim they haven't got to yet."
>
> For MS, it's clearly advanta
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Con Zymaris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What are the odds of taping this session and pasting it up on a video
> sharing site? It would also be interesting to see Microsoft's response
> to the question of the session being taped.
We are going to have the video available for do
> Excellentbut I would like to suggest that it is very important that MS
> state their reasons for attendance _before_ the event.
>
> A large corp such as MS does not decide one day to attend LUGs without
> having a really good reason.
A large 'corp' doesn't have a singular focus or decisio
Hi,
On Jan 12, 2008 10:47 PM, Sridhar Dhanapalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008, "Brent Wallis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > K...so they asked to come along or did someone invite them?
>
> They offered, and we treated them with even more scepticism and conditions
> than we wo
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008, "Brent Wallis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some questions come to mind and am wondering if this list could be
> given more info
>
> On Jan 12, 2008 7:06 PM, Sridhar Dhanapalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > /me dons his flame-retardant suit
> >
> > If you could ask
19 matches
Mail list logo
