I don't know about the other MVP's, but I certainly paid for my MVP status.
It wasn't cash, rather is was my time, which I think even for the salaried
amongst us has some cash value. For the consultants amonst us, there is a
very definite cash value attached to it.

Therefore, you've just managed to prove that there isn't a difference
between MVP status and certifications, which you've said aren't conflicts of
interest. So, I'm in with Ed on this one - your arguments don't hold.

Roger
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 1:02 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> How am I changing position? I have always stated that the 
> problem with MVP
> is that it is a gift. If you paid for it and it were not a 
> gift, then it
> is something that you PAID for, just like MCSE or any other 
> certification.
> Explain how this is a change in my point of view?
> 
> > You've never proven that it is a breach of ethics, much 
> less egregious.  And
> > your admission of even a slight change of your point of 
> view shows just how
> > fatuous your argument is.
> > 
> > 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 9:41 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> > 
> > Well, you're missing the big picture and the whole point, 
> but yes, if you
> > paid Microsoft, even one dollar, then it would not be such 
> an egregious
> > breach of 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 you want, if you can't even pass the ethics test 
> of your own
> > making.
> > > > I didn't post any of those points on your website, 
> someone from YOUR
> > > > company did, and you are the one claiming to hold them 
> near and dear.
> > > > 
> > > > How interesting that you choose to respond ONLY to one 
> point, and 
> > > > then make irrelevant statements about people calling you names.
> > > > 
> > > > 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
> > > > that you are stupid.  I now consider you incapable of 
> having any 
> > > > type of intelligent discussion based on the fact that 
> you choose to
> > > > ignore 2/3rds of what was posted, or should I just 
> assume that you 
> > > > chose not to discuss those points because you couldn't 
> keep your "I have
> > my Ethics"
> > > > argument and all this would be moot?
> > > > 
> > > > Speaking of MOOT, can anyone tell me what top 10 
> classic rock single
> > > > contains the word "MOOT"?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Bob Sadler
> > > > 
> > > > -----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
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 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 when I was called a "liar" or a "wife beater" 
> or "stupid" or
> > "idiot"
> > > > or that I "starve children". All of that is OK in your whacky 
> > > > bizarro world, but explaining to someone that if you 
> start a fight 
> > > > (in email for Christ's
> > > > sake) that I will finish that fight. Oh that is 
> TERRIBLE! How could
> > > > you SAY such a thing. Never mind the "liar", "stupid", "idiot" 
> > > > stuff, THAT, sir, is uncalled for.
> > > > 
> > > > Bob, you amaze me.
> > > > 
> > > > > You know, I'm just as happy to NOT read this dribble, 
> but when 
> > > > > someone
> > > > 
> > > > > points out so wonderfully how ethical they are, and 
> we can all go
> > > > > to=20 www.infonition.com/ethics.shtml to prove it, 
> then someone 
> > > > > like me just
> > > > 
> > > > > might go there and read, and low and behold what is 
> it we find?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Well, this character Greg, wants us all to believe 
> his "ethics" 
> > > > >are=20  without question.  So, let's take a look at 
> his ethics page
> > > > >and see=20  what he's supposed to be doing.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > First, Greg's point of vendor conflict is answered here:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > To never accept compensation from vendors for recommending =
> > > > products=3D20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > One must ask then Greg, have you ever been to a seminar, 
> > > > >conference,=20  or LUNCH where the vendor presenting 
> paid for the 
> > > > >meal, the snacks,=20  the coffee?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Second, Greg's list of ethics claim:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > To disclose any and all influences that may affect our=20 
> > > > >recommendations=3D20 =20  Greg, does this mean that if 
> I were to 
> > > > >speak to you over the phone,=20  you would tell me 
> just how many 
> > > > >times your Cisco, Microsoft, Bay=20  Networks, etc., 
> Rep. has called?
> > > > >Or are you saying that you never=20  meet with the vendors to 
> > > > >discuss how their products can benefit your=20  
> customers?  Do you
> > > > >ever read trade magazines that discuss the use of=20  
> one vendors 
> > > > >products over another?  Will you then tell me all 
> the=20  magazines
> > > > >you read, what date, publication, page number, etc?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Third, Greg's list goes on to say:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > To be fair and accurate when resolving disputes, problems or 
> > > > >issues=20  [and] To conduct ourselves in a 
> professional manner at 
> > > > >all times=3D20 =20  One must ask then Greg, exactly 
> how does your 
> > > > >statement of: "Wrong.=20  You brought it up by 
> throwing stones my 
> > > > >way. I don't pick fights, I=20  finish them." work into these 
> > > > >statements?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > This is just what I don't need in a vendor.  Someone 
> who believes
> > > > >he's
> > > > 
> > > > > always right, and if he is going to have a fight with his 
> > > > >customers,=20  HE'S going to finish it.  I can see now 
> why people 
> > > > >flock to your=20  organization Greg.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > The point is, don't say something matters a great 
> deal to you, 
> > > > >and=20  then give this list plenty of examples showing that 
> > > > >apparently it=20  doesn't. You want to wave a flag 
> around and say 
> > > > >"I have ethics" and=20  yet not live by those same 
> ethics, then be
> > > > >prepared to be inundated=20  with the onslaught.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > I would trust Ed, Tom, Tony, and even Don, further 
> then I would 
> > > > >trust=20  someone yelling about how ethical they are 
> and at the 
> > > > >same time say=20  they'll finish any fight.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > It's time to throttle back now greg, and realize 
> this.  You are 
> > > > >a=20 Sales Manager for a company that apparently you 
> are supposed 
> > > > >to be=20 drumming up business for.  Just how much 
> business do you 
> > > > >think you=20 have generated on this list after acting 
> in the manner you
> > did?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Bob Sadler
> > > > >=20
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > 
> > > > 
> _________________________________________________________________
> > > > 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_
> > > mo
> > > de=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]

_________________________________________________________________
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]

Reply via email to