You do not have a clue, All you understand is how to complain and insult. That’s all I heard thus far.
Its tough having someone throw it back at yah! It sort of feels good!
I know how hard Pete, Gene, Mark and the rest them work in order to make progress. It slow and sometimes painful. Stand up in front of these guys, and it does not matter what colors you are wearing, your fair game.
If it is broken then fix it.
I have not heard one shred of evidence where you went to a meeting or even so much as sent a proposal or even a
brief explanation of what needs to be fixed. Tell Us! Come on show me the money. Enlighten the audience!
TC
From: don clay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 19:52:42 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [temp t13] Re: INF-8020_history
Here is another example of what I'm discussing.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of System Administrator
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 2:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [temp t13] Re: INF-8020_history
Yeah! Let's complain and formulate that the world is rotten and nobody listens to me so I start crying like a child and waste a significant amount of time Boo Hoh! Hoh! Bang that rattle.
Yes! Reality is what is and so far, what contributions have been made to change it. Zippo!
On Monday, May 21, 2001, at 12:48 PM, don clay wrote:
This is a fairy tale and bears no resemblance of the reality of the situation. Please don't contribute any more to the "if you'll come to the meeting…" and "All proposals are considered fairly …." dribble.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf OfSystem Administrator
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 12:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [temp t13] Re: INF-8020_history
Absolutely;
"getting involved with these specifications and not stick their heads in the
sand and then complain about it when these said specifications get
incorporated into standards." (MKE)
"That's what I been saying, get involved and make your proposals known and of course document them so that they are stored on the T13 site for later reference. I heard to much crying lately, than good proposals to solve the known issues. As MKE has stated "get involved" and remember that not every proposal gets approved when first presented and that's the way it goes. It takes work and cooperation by all participants. I know?
It's funny that in the T13 meetings the proposals are discussed, digested, dissected and if you put in the time. Success!. But on the reflector if the proposal or topic is discussed and someone finds is objectionable, instead of solving the issue or making a real contributions, there are attacks on the persons character or technical abilities. More blaming than a forward direction. The past is the past and and should be left there. If you want someones help its not a good idea to blame them for your own short comings. It does not set well with those that are looking for real contributions to solve the big issues. In the past month I have only witnessed, one email stating that a proposal was up loaded and available for viewing. The remainder was..............
This reflector is quite amusing. I suspect that those who sit silent, see the inappropiate traffic and are forming their own opinions.
Show me real resolutions and solutions.
TC
*These comments are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
On Monday, May 21, 2001, at 09:57 AM, Eschmann, Michael K wrote:
** This is the quasi-official and semi-temporary T13 email list server. **
Hale,
Dal and you do have a difference of opinions on the timeline of events. If
you sent your comments later than when SFF finished and SFF had already sent
on their spec to "Higher Authority", then you missed the boat and needed to
chase down the "Higher Authority". Maybe that is what happened when you had
to get T13 to make ATA/ATAPI spec changes.
Alternately, I agree that if you sent your comments during spec development
and before the SFF8020 hand-off date, then shame on SFF. If this happened,
then I agree that Don (and everyone else) should be crying foul.
The same thing is happening with other ATA-related specifications today. If
anyone wants to affect what will be presented to T13, then I'd suggest
getting involved with these specifications and not stick their heads in the
sand and then complain about it when these said specifications get
incorporated into standards.
MKE.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hale Landis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 9:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [temp t13] Re: INF-8020_history
** This is the quasi-official and semi-temporary T13 email list server. **
On Mon, 21 May 2001 08:07:31 -0700, Eschmann, Michael K wrote:
Come on Don, Please read ALL of both sides. Hale believes that his
messages
were ignored, but if you would read more than your point of view, Dal Allan
indicates that his messages did not come in while SFF8020 was being worked
and voted on. If I may quote Dal: "Once the horse is out of the barn,
closing the door does not help". MKE.
Do be too hard on Don. He actually has it right. Just to set the
record straight: At the time of the SFF-8020 revision 2.x development
I was not a member of SFF and I was not working for a SFF member
company. But during that time I did review most of the SFF-8020 draft
documents, probably posted messages to the SFF reflector about
problems in those documents. AND I sent private emails to the two
people listed as the editors of SFF-8020. I might even have some of
those emails on my old 386 system. As I said, I never received a
single response and none of the problems I pointed out (except the
SRST/DASP- problem) were ever fixed. And T13 is still fussing over
some of those very same problems today, some 6+ years later.
I don't really care what the "official" record says with respect to
this because all of this happened "outside" of meetings and prior to
the letter ballot Dal talks about. We all know that most of the work
of a committee like SFF or T13 or T10 is done outside of meetings and
all you see in the committe minutes and letter ballot comments is the
most abreviated description of what happened.
For example, look at the minutes for the last T13 meeting (April
2001). I don't disagree with the desciption of the ATAPI discussion
(item iv), and I know it would be difficult to capture everything
that was said in a two hour discussion, but the description in the
minutes is a very short summary of what happened. And I just noticed
that those minutes don't include anything about the long discussion
of ATAPI command sets that I count as part of the two hour ATAPI
discussion. So going back 6 years to the minutes of SFF meetings and
to the letter ballot comments for an SFF document is not going to
give you even the slightest clue as to what really happened.
*** Hale Landis *** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
*** Niwot, CO USA *** www.ata-atapi.com ***
--
If you have any questions or wish to unsubscribe send a
message to Hale Landis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to
this list server send your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For questions concerning Thistle Grove Industries or TGI's
list services please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
If you have any questions or wish to unsubscribe send a
message to Hale Landis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to
this list server send your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For questions concerning Thistle Grove Industries or TGI's
list services please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
