Oh gosh, I had no idea we've been talking about this for 8 years! And because you were able to resist the great Satan, now you come here and tell us all that those damnable MVP's here are leading us into sin! I see the light!
OK, thanks, move along now. Bob Sadler -----Original Message----- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics Again, your ignorance of the facts makes you look foolish. I was asked to be an MVP and turned it down. That's what started this whole mess 8 years ago. > I get this strange idea that someone wasn't chosen to be an MVP and is > very very angry about it :) > > > > Bob Sadler > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:30 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > > > So how fundamentally different is paying Microsoft to be a Partner > than being an MVP? It's true that I don't pay actual money to be an > MVP, but I do work for it. Don't you have to sign lots of agreement > papers to be a Partner? Do you give all your customers copies of > those papers so they can assess the level of conflict of interest? So > if I send Microsoft a dollar for my MVP status, the conflict of > interest ends? > > You still haven't proven your assertion that my accepting the small > gratuity and title associated with MVP constitutes a conflict of > interest. Your only proof so far is along the lines of, "It's > obvious," or "It is because I say it is." Perhaps it's because you > can't prove it? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 8:51 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > > First, you have no credibility on the point. You find the phrase "I > finish them (fights)" offensive but not someone being called a "liar", > "stupid", "idiot", "wife beater". You simply have zaro credibility. > > Second, as for your other two points, our customers and potential > customers are made well aware of any and all potential conflicts of > interest. We practice full disclosure. In addition, meeting with a > vendor to talk about their new products is in no way even CLOSE to > accepting a title or gift from said vendor. But, there is no point to > even debating this with you because you are never going to see it > because you are going to deny the obvious. Yes, I have to deal with > vendors just like everyone else in this industry. It is a fact of > life. But, I don't have to like it and no, generally, I almost NEVER > meet with vendors and when I do, it is for specific purposes, I get > in, get the information and get out. > > Finally, you have obviously shown your bias by claiming that I claim > to be the "all ethical" sort. And to my knowledge, I have no "ethics > test" that I have created. This is a blatant mis-characterization and > exposes your bias. I am not, nor ever will be "all ethical" and > "holier than thou". I have > *different* ethics apparently than many on this board, but I have > never claimed to be perfect or that my ethics are the end all, be all. > Yes, I have paid to attend conventions, I have paid to be a Microsoft > "partner". In some strict ethical vaccuum those may be considered > unethical, but this is the real world. And besides that, there is a > clear, bright line between paying a vendor to attend a convention and > accepting a pure gift from a vendor. That bright line is what I have > been talking about, but you are never going to see it because you will > never admit to the obvious and just want to pick a fight. > > And yes, for all of you out there, I am nearly certain that, in my > youth, I accepted direct gifts from vendors. I cannot recall any > particular occassion, but I'm willing to bet that it probably > occurred. And guess what? I stopped that long, long, long ago because > IT IS WRONG. > > So, to sum it up, you have no credibility that you have been > "offended" in any way because there have been lots more offensive > stuff said that you have not said boo about. And, you are in > self-denial about the DISTINCT difference between accepting a pure > gift from a vendor and PAYING that vendor to attend a convention, etc. > Here's a hint. One costs you money, the other doesn't. > > > I am not "quibbling" with what you said, I'm instead taking offense > >at what you said. You see, you can't claim to be the "all ethical" > >sort=20 you want, if you can't even pass the ethics test of your own > >making. =20 I didn't post any of those points on your website, > >someone from YOUR=20 company did, and you are the one claiming to > >hold them near and dear. =20 How interesting that you choose to > >respond ONLY to one point, and then make irrelevant statements about > >people calling you names. =20 > > Since I didn't call you names sir, perhaps you should go back and > > re-read the whole message. It's not that I consider you a liar, or=20 > > that you are stupid. I now consider you incapable of having any type=20 > > of intelligent discussion based on the fact that you choose to ignore=20 > > 2/3rds of what was posted, or should I just assume that you chose not=20 > > to discuss those points because you couldn't keep your "I have my > Ethics" > > argument and all this would be moot? > >=20 > > Speaking of MOOT, can anyone tell me what top 10 classic rock single > >contains the word "MOOT"? =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Bob Sadler > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 9:50 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics > >=20 > >=20 > > So you are going to quibble with things that "I" said? You people are > > so whacked out that it is utterly incomprehensible. So where were you=20 > > when I was called a "liar" or a "wife beater" or "stupid" or "idiot"=20 > > or that I "starve children". All of that is OK in your whacky bizarro=20 > > world, but explaining to someone that if you start a fight (in email=20 > > for Christ's > > sake) that I will finish that fight. Oh that is TERRIBLE! How could=20 > > you SAY such a thing. Never mind the "liar", "stupid", "idiot" stuff,=20 > > THAT, sir, is uncalled for. > >=20 > > Bob, you amaze me. > >=20 > > > You know, I'm just as happy to NOT read this dribble, but when > > > someone > >=20 > > > points out so wonderfully how ethical they are, and we can all go > > > to=3D20 www.infonition.com/ethics.shtml to prove it, then someone > > > = > like > > > > me just > >=20 > > > might go there and read, and low and behold what is it we find? = > =3D20 > > > Well, this character Greg, wants us all to believe his "ethics"=20 > > >are=3D20 without question. So, let's take a look at his ethics > > >page = > > > >and see=3D20 what he's supposed to be doing. > > >=3D20 > > > First, Greg's point of vendor conflict is answered here: =3D20 > > > To never accept compensation from vendors for recommending =3D > > products=3D3D20 > > >=3D20 > > > One must ask then Greg, have you ever been to a seminar, > > >conference,=3D20 or LUNCH where the vendor presenting paid for > > >the=20 meal, the snacks,=3D20 the coffee? =3D20 > > > Second, Greg's list of ethics claim: > > >=3D20 > > > To disclose any and all influences that may affect our=3D20 =20 > > >recommendations=3D3D20 =3D20 Greg, does this mean that if I were to=20 > > >speak to you over the phone,=3D20 you would tell me just how many=20 > > >times your Cisco, Microsoft, Bay=3D20 Networks, etc., Rep. has = > called? > > > >Or are you saying that you never=3D20 meet with the vendors to = > discuss > > > >how their products can benefit your=3D20 customers? Do you ever = > read=20 > > >trade magazines that discuss the use of=3D20 one vendors products = > over > > > >another? Will you then tell me all the=3D20 magazines you read, = > what=20 > > >date, publication, page number, etc? > > >=3D20 > > > Third, Greg's list goes on to say: > > >=3D20 > > > To be fair and accurate when resolving disputes, problems or=20 > > >issues=3D20 [and] To conduct ourselves in a professional manner at = > all > > > >times=3D3D20 =3D20 One must ask then Greg, exactly how does your=20 > > >statement of: "Wrong.=3D20 You brought it up by throwing stones my=20 > > >way. I don't pick fights, I=3D20 finish them." work into these=20 > > >statements? > > >=3D20 > > > This is just what I don't need in a vendor. Someone who believes=20 > > >he's > >=20 > > > always right, and if he is going to have a fight with his > > >customers,=3D20 HE'S going to finish it. I can see now why people=20 > > >flock to your=3D20 organization Greg. > > >=3D20 > > > The point is, don't say something matters a great deal to you,=20 > > >and=3D20 then give this list plenty of examples showing that=20 > > >apparently it=3D20 doesn't. You want to wave a flag around and say = > "I=20 > > >have ethics" and=3D20 yet not live by those same ethics, then be=20 > > >prepared to be inundated=3D20 with the onslaught. > > >=3D20 > > > I would trust Ed, Tom, Tony, and even Don, further then I would=20 > > >trust=3D20 someone yelling about how ethical they are and at the = > same=20 > > >time say=3D20 they'll finish any fight. > > >=3D20 > > > It's time to throttle back now greg, and realize this. You are = > a=3D20 > > > >Sales Manager for a company that apparently you are supposed to = > be=3D20 > > > >drumming up business for. Just how much business do you think = > you=3D20 > > > >have generated on this list after acting in the manner you did? > > >=3D20 > > > Bob Sadler > > >=3D20 > > > -----Original Message----- > >=20 > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Web Interface:=20 > > = > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3D3Dexchange&text_mo > > de=3D3D=3D > > & > > lang=3D3Denglish > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Web Interface: > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3Dexchange&text_mode =3D= > & > lang > =3Denglish > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Web Interface: > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3Dexchange&text_mode =3D= > & > lang=3Denglish > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
