After awhile I start to spot a trend from some people posting here that they are not trying to learn how to do something, they have figured out how to get IBM-MAIN to do their job for them.
So if someone asks how to audit a program 'A' and then later asks how to audit program 'B', did they learn anything the first time? If they ask for a program to use the SMF data and someone directs them to a working assembler sample on cbttape.org but it isn't the exact report they want, fixing the program for them makes the fixer an enabler and unpaid-consultant. That goes beyong sharing knowledge. Showing how to fix a few lines of code is sharing, rewriting the program is doing their job for them. Feeling like a hero for providing the answer does not mean they original poster learned anything. If the auditors are truly coming up with all of these problems, maybe they need to provide the solution for the fee they are paid, too. Is the LISTSERV to share information or do the job for someone else for free? On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:27:00 -0500, Tom Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >We all read & post here to both seek & share our knowledge, don't we? Or >have I completely misunderstood ibm-main's purpose? > >-- >Tom Schmidt > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
