ANNC: FPGA Design Software Webcast

Discussion in 'VHDL' started by bart, May 7, 2008.

  1. bart

    bart Guest

    Lattice is holding a webcast today, Wednesday, May 7th, on our latest
    version of our FPGA software design tools "ispLEVER 7.1 FPGA Design
    Tool Technical Rollout." The presenter will be Troy Scott, from our
    software marketing group.

    If you're interested, the event takes place live at 11am Pacific,
    18:00 GMT. In addition, you will be able to view this webcast archive
    on-demand, at your convenience, starting a few hours after the live
    event takes place.

    You can register by clicking:
    http://www.latticesemi.com/corporate/webcasts/isplever7.1fpgadesigntool.cfm

    Bart Borosky, Lattice
     
    bart, May 7, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. bart

    John_H Guest

    John Larkin wrote:
    >
    > To Lattice:
    >
    > We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    > you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.
    >
    >
    > To the group:
    >
    > Whenever anybody spams us, please
    >
    > 1. Blackball them as a vendor
    >
    > 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    > lots of google-searchable keywords.
    >
    > John


    Was this really necessary?

    If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.
    If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    that frequent.

    I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?

    Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.

    - John_H
     
    John_H, May 7, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. bart

    Rich Grise Guest

    On Thu, 08 May 2008 07:37:44 +1200, Jim Granville wrote:

    > Do all your design decisions have the same carefull reasoning basis ?


    Does all your writing show the same careful editing? >:->

    Cheers!
    Rich
     
    Rich Grise, May 8, 2008
    #3
  4. "BobW" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "John Larkin" <> wrote in
    > message news:eek:...
    >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>John Larkin wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> To Lattice:
    >>>>
    >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> To the group:
    >>>>
    >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please
    >>>>
    >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor
    >>>>
    >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords.
    >>>>
    >>>> John
    >>>
    >>>Was this really necessary?
    >>>
    >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.
    >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    >>>that frequent.
    >>>
    >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?
    >>>
    >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.
    >>>
    >>>- John_H

    >>
    >>
    >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded
    >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who
    >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make
    >> sure it *doesn't* pay off.
    >>
    >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else.
    >>
    >>
    >> John
    >>

    >
    > For what it's worth, I agree with John.
    >
    > It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter
    > commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those.
    > Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.


    Come on guys, get over it, really.
    The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so the
    OP did the right thing.
    It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are
    interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened it.
    I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement to
    the correct groups with the correct formatting.
    Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design
    group with many FPGA designers afer all.

    Dave.
     
    David L. Jones, May 8, 2008
    #4
  5. bart

    rickman Guest

    On May 8, 8:35 am, "David L. Jones" <> wrote:
    > "BobW" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > "John Larkin" <> wrote in
    > > messagenews:eek:...
    > >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H
    > >> <> wrote:

    >
    > >>>John Larkin wrote:

    >
    > >>>> To Lattice:

    >
    > >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    > >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.

    >
    > >>>> To the group:

    >
    > >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please

    >
    > >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor

    >
    > >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    > >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords.

    >
    > >>>> John

    >
    > >>>Was this really necessary?

    >
    > >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    > >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.
    > >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    > >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    > >>>that frequent.

    >
    > >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    > >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    > >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?

    >
    > >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.

    >
    > >>>- John_H

    >
    > >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded
    > >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who
    > >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make
    > >> sure it *doesn't* pay off.

    >
    > >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else.

    >
    > >> John

    >
    > > For what it's worth, I agree with John.

    >
    > > It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter
    > > commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those.
    > > Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.

    >
    > Come on guys, get over it, really.
    > The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so the
    > OP did the right thing.
    > It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are
    > interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened it.
    > I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement to
    > the correct groups with the correct formatting.
    > Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design
    > group with many FPGA designers afer all.
    >
    > Dave.


    I have to agree with John L on this one. I don't think we should in
    any way encourage commercial posts here. The issue is quantity. If
    we are happy with one post, why not 100? There are a couple of groups
    I visit that have been virtually ruined by advertising. No, it is not
    on topic advertising, but I don't think that is the point. The
    quantity is the problem. I can see some groups getting hundreds or
    thousands of on topic posts a day if all vendors did this. Can you
    imagine how flooded comp.arch.embedded would be if every maker of
    MCUs, memory, I/O chips, etc. posted just one message a day?

    If you like these messages and want to receive them, why not get on
    the vendor's email list? I'm sure they will only be too happy to
    directly email you with all sorts of information. Isn't that what opt-
    in mail lists are for???
     
    rickman, May 8, 2008
    #5
  6. bart

    rickman Guest

    On May 7, 2:11 pm, John Larkin
    <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 7 May 2008 10:52:01 -0700 (PDT), bart
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > >Lattice is holding a webcast today, Wednesday, May 7th, on our latest
    > >version of our FPGA software design tools "ispLEVER 7.1 FPGA Design
    > >Tool Technical Rollout." The presenter will be Troy Scott, from our
    > >software marketing group.

    >
    > >If you're interested, the event takes place live at 11am Pacific,
    > >18:00 GMT. In addition, you will be able to view this webcast archive
    > >on-demand, at your convenience, starting a few hours after the live
    > >event takes place.

    >
    > >You can register by clicking:
    > >http://www.latticesemi.com/corporate/webcasts/isplever7.1fpgadesignto...

    >
    > >Bart Borosky, Lattice

    >
    > To Lattice:
    >
    > We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    > you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.
    >
    > To the group:
    >
    > Whenever anybody spams us, please
    >
    > 1. Blackball them as a vendor
    >
    > 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    > lots of google-searchable keywords.
    >
    > John


    I didn't realize that this thread is cross posted to... five different
    groups. I guess we get to read it more than once as well.

    I can't exactly blackball Lattice. I just designed in one of their
    parts because it was almost the only part that would suit all of the
    requirements. Altera has their new zero power PLDs (it's about time
    guys) and Xilinx is still stuck in the 90's with their near total lack
    of Flash based FPGAs. (yeah, I know they have a dual die spartan
    flash chip, but they blew the packaging). So Lattice may not be
    perfect, (is anyone?) but I can't blacklist them because they posted
    to a newsgroup I read.

    Rick
     
    rickman, May 8, 2008
    #6
  7. bart

    ehsjr Guest

    CBFalconer wrote:
    > John Larkin wrote:
    >
    >>bart <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Lattice is holding a webcast today, Wednesday, May 7th, on our
    >>>latest version of our FPGA software design tools "ispLEVER 7.1
    >>>FPGA Design Tool Technical Rollout." The presenter will be Troy
    >>>Scott, from our software marketing group.
    >>>
    >>>If you're interested, the event takes place live at 11am Pacific,
    >>>18:00 GMT. In addition, you will be able to view this webcast
    >>>archive on-demand, at your convenience, starting a few hours
    >>>after the live event takes place.
    >>>
    >>>You can register by clicking:
    >>> http://www.latticesemi.com/corporate/webcasts/isplever7.1fpgadesigntool.cfm

    >>
    >>We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance.
    >>Now that you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.

    >
    >
    > You're wrong. Proper announcements are quite topical. The quality
    > may be questionable, and that is also suitable for discussion. Of
    > course, making the announcement less than one hour before the event
    > begins is indicative of poor thinking. Even 24 hours notice would
    > be cutting it close.
    >



    It's a question of opinion, not of fact, so it's not a
    matter of right or wrong.

    Your observation "Proper announcements are quite topical."
    supports the "it is not spam" point of view.

    As you point out, Lattice (or at least its representative
    Mr. Borosky) has not given a lot of thought to getting the
    notice out in a "proper" manner. By "proper", I mean where
    and when it would do Lattice the most good. That supports
    the "it is spam" point of view.

    For the record, I agree with JL. Posted here as it was it is
    spam, in my opinion.

    Ed
     
    ehsjr, May 8, 2008
    #7
  8. bart

    Robert Miles Guest

    "David L. Jones" <> wrote in message
    news:4822f3a7$...
    >
    > "BobW" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> "John Larkin" <> wrote in
    >> message news:eek:...
    >>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>John Larkin wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> To Lattice:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    >>>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> To the group:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    >>>>> lots of google-searchable keywords.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> John
    >>>>
    >>>>Was this really necessary?
    >>>>
    >>>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    >>>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.
    >>>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    >>>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    >>>>that frequent.
    >>>>
    >>>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    >>>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    >>>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?
    >>>>
    >>>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.
    >>>>
    >>>>- John_H
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded
    >>> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who
    >>> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make
    >>> sure it *doesn't* pay off.
    >>>
    >>> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> John
    >>>

    >>
    >> For what it's worth, I agree with John.
    >>
    >> It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter
    >> commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those.
    >> Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.

    >
    > Come on guys, get over it, really.
    > The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so
    > the OP did the right thing.
    > It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are
    > interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened
    > it.
    > I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement
    > to the correct groups with the correct formatting.
    > Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design
    > group with many FPGA designers afer all.
    >
    > Dave.

    The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. Are the
    people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the one who say don't?
     
    Robert Miles, May 8, 2008
    #8
  9. bart

    Ben Bradley Guest

    In the newsgroups comp.arch.fpga, comp.lang.verilog,
    comp.arch.embedded, sci.electronics.design and comp.lang.vhdl, I saw a
    thread in which the following words were approximately attributed to
    the following posters:

    On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:19:31 -0700, "BobW"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"John Larkin" <> wrote in message
    >news:eek:...
    >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>John Larkin wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> To Lattice:
    >>>>
    >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> To the group:
    >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please
    >>>>
    >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor
    >>>>
    >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords.
    >>>>
    >>>> John
    >>>
    >>>Was this really necessary?


    Yes.

    >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.


    Email them, and sign up for subscriptions to all their blurbs. A
    confirmed opt-in email list is a good way to disseminate such info. If
    they don't have such a list or don't announce events timely, tell them
    you'll only consider sources from companies who do.

    >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    >>>that frequent.


    "Well, there's spam egg Lattice and spam, that's not got much spam
    in it."

    In other words, "they're not breaking the rules THAT often." With
    the thousands of suppliers that provide products and services relevant
    to even one of the cross-posted newsgroups, there could be hundreds of
    posts per day of "legitimate" commercial posts.

    >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?


    It's always good to be vocal about inappropriate posts. As for the
    poster airing his previous problems with Lattice, perhaps they would
    be better put in a blog or in a post where someone asks about using
    Lattice, but that's a minor thing compared to the original post.

    >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.


    I have better things to do than manage kill lists. I've got "better
    things to do" than write this, but but c.a.e and especially s.e.d have
    been useful to me a while back, and between all the spam and splorge
    in recent years, it's a pleasant surprise to see these groups are
    still viable. So I'm doing my little part to help keep them alive.

    >>>
    >>>- John_H

    >>
    >>
    >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded
    >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who
    >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make
    >> sure it *doesn't* pay off.
    >>
    >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else.
    >>
    >>
    >> John
    >>

    >
    >For what it's worth, I agree with John.
    >
    >It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter
    >commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those.
    >Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.


    Just to make a slight correction, THESE NEWSGROUPS (see crosspost
    list at the top of my post) are not the proper place for commercial
    posts. There are "marketplace" and "sex" newsgroups - if he's going to
    spam, perhaps Bart Borosky of Lattice would do well to post to those
    instead. There's no telling where a lonely engineer might go in his
    spare time, and after all, "posting to Usenet is free" (as in both
    beer AND speech).

    Post, drink and speak responsibly.

    >
    >Bob
     
    Ben Bradley, May 18, 2008
    #9
  10. bart

    Alex Guest

    On May 18, 1:29 pm, Ben Bradley <>
    wrote:
    > In the newsgroups comp.arch.fpga, comp.lang.verilog,
    > comp.arch.embedded, sci.electronics.design and comp.lang.vhdl, I saw a
    > thread in which the following words were approximately attributed to
    > the following posters:
    >
    > On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:19:31 -0700, "BobW"
    >
    >
    >
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >"John Larkin" <> wrote in message
    > >news:eek:...
    > >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H
    > >> <> wrote:

    >
    > >>>John Larkin wrote:

    >
    > >>>> To Lattice:

    >
    > >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that
    > >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.

    >
    > >>>> To the group:
    > >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please

    >
    > >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor

    >
    > >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with
    > >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords.

    >
    > >>>> John

    >
    > >>>Was this really necessary?

    >
    > Yes.
    >
    > >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    > >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.

    >
    > Email them, and sign up for subscriptions to all their blurbs. A
    > confirmed opt-in email list is a good way to disseminate such info. If
    > they don't have such a list or don't announce events timely, tell them
    > you'll only consider sources from companies who do.
    >
    > >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    > >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    > >>>that frequent.

    >
    > "Well, there's spam egg Lattice and spam, that's not got much spam
    > in it."
    >
    > In other words, "they're not breaking the rules THAT often." With
    > the thousands of suppliers that provide products and services relevant
    > to even one of the cross-posted newsgroups, there could be hundreds of
    > posts per day of "legitimate" commercial posts.
    >
    > >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    > >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    > >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?

    >
    > It's always good to be vocal about inappropriate posts. As for the
    > poster airing his previous problems with Lattice, perhaps they would
    > be better put in a blog or in a post where someone asks about using
    > Lattice, but that's a minor thing compared to the original post.
    >
    > >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.

    >
    > I have better things to do than manage kill lists. I've got "better
    > things to do" than write this, but but c.a.e and especially s.e.d have
    > been useful to me a while back, and between all the spam and splorge
    > in recent years, it's a pleasant surprise to see these groups are
    > still viable. So I'm doing my little part to help keep them alive.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >>>- John_H

    >
    > >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded
    > >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who
    > >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make
    > >> sure it *doesn't* pay off.

    >
    > >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else.

    >
    > >> John

    >
    > >For what it's worth, I agree with John.

    >
    > >It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter
    > >commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those.
    > >Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.

    >
    > Just to make a slight correction, THESE NEWSGROUPS (see crosspost
    > list at the top of my post) are not the proper place for commercial
    > posts. There are "marketplace" and "sex" newsgroups - if he's going to
    > spam, perhaps Bart Borosky of Lattice would do well to post to those
    > instead. There's no telling where a lonely engineer might go in his
    > spare time, and after all, "posting to Usenet is free" (as in both
    > beer AND speech).
    >
    > Post, drink and speak responsibly.
    >
    >
    >
    > >Bob


    Guys,

    I read this thread after it was created and just wanted to ask a
    couple of questions (while completely agreeing with the generally
    accepted conclusion):
    Was all this 'hot air' necessary?
    Was all this bad-mouthing coming from some of the authors proper for
    the group?

    With respect,
     
    Alex, May 18, 2008
    #10
  11. bart

    Robert Miles Guest

    "Alex" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On May 18, 1:29 pm, Ben Bradley <>
    > wrote:
    >> In the newsgroups comp.arch.fpga, comp.lang.verilog,
    >> comp.arch.embedded, sci.electronics.design and comp.lang.vhdl, I saw a
    >> thread in which the following words were approximately attributed to
    >> the following posters:
    >>
    >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:19:31 -0700, "BobW"
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >"John Larkin" <> wrote in
    >> >message
    >> >news:eek:...
    >> >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H
    >> >> <> wrote:

    >>
    >> >>>John Larkin wrote:

    >>
    >> >>>> To Lattice:

    >>
    >> >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now
    >> >>>> that
    >> >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent.

    >>
    >> >>>> To the group:
    >> >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please

    >>
    >> >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor

    >>
    >> >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably
    >> >>>> with
    >> >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords.

    >>
    >> >>>> John

    >>
    >> >>>Was this really necessary?

    >>
    >> Yes.
    >>
    >> >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like
    >> >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand.

    >>
    >> Email them, and sign up for subscriptions to all their blurbs. A
    >> confirmed opt-in email list is a good way to disseminate such info. If
    >> they don't have such a list or don't announce events timely, tell them
    >> you'll only consider sources from companies who do.
    >>
    >> >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from
    >> >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't
    >> >>>that frequent.

    >>
    >> "Well, there's spam egg Lattice and spam, that's not got much spam
    >> in it."
    >>
    >> In other words, "they're not breaking the rules THAT often." With
    >> the thousands of suppliers that provide products and services relevant
    >> to even one of the cross-posted newsgroups, there could be hundreds of
    >> posts per day of "legitimate" commercial posts.
    >>
    >> >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't
    >> >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is
    >> >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal?

    >>
    >> It's always good to be vocal about inappropriate posts. As for the
    >> poster airing his previous problems with Lattice, perhaps they would
    >> be better put in a blog or in a post where someone asks about using
    >> Lattice, but that's a minor thing compared to the original post.
    >>
    >> >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you.

    >>
    >> I have better things to do than manage kill lists. I've got "better
    >> things to do" than write this, but but c.a.e and especially s.e.d have
    >> been useful to me a while back, and between all the spam and splorge
    >> in recent years, it's a pleasant surprise to see these groups are
    >> still viable. So I'm doing my little part to help keep them alive.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> >>>- John_H

    >>
    >> >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded
    >> >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who
    >> >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make
    >> >> sure it *doesn't* pay off.

    >>
    >> >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else.

    >>
    >> >> John

    >>
    >> >For what it's worth, I agree with John.

    >>
    >> >It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter
    >> >commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those.
    >> >Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.

    >>
    >> Just to make a slight correction, THESE NEWSGROUPS (see crosspost
    >> list at the top of my post) are not the proper place for commercial
    >> posts. There are "marketplace" and "sex" newsgroups - if he's going to
    >> spam, perhaps Bart Borosky of Lattice would do well to post to those
    >> instead. There's no telling where a lonely engineer might go in his
    >> spare time, and after all, "posting to Usenet is free" (as in both
    >> beer AND speech).
    >>
    >> Post, drink and speak responsibly.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> >Bob

    >
    > Guys,
    >
    > I read this thread after it was created and just wanted to ask a
    > couple of questions (while completely agreeing with the generally
    > accepted conclusion):
    > Was all this 'hot air' necessary?
    > Was all this bad-mouthing coming from some of the authors proper for
    > the group?
    >
    > With respect,


    Which group? It was crossposted to 5 different newsgroups, and is
    unwelcome in at least one of them.
     
    Robert Miles, May 18, 2008
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. bart
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    581
  2. bart
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    438
  3. bart
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    420
  4. bart
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    450
  5. bart
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    996
Loading...

Share This Page