JaMi, Abd. has provided me with very much appreciated help - Sometimes he's been the only person to respond to my query. Certainly his answers have always been spot-on. He has saved me much time, and his help has always been freely given. If you don't want to read his posts, then don't read them. Seems pretty simple to me. I agree wholeheartedly with Thomas' post below.
Steve. > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 19 February 2002 08:21 > To: 'Protel EDA Forum' > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Writing messages all day . . . hopefully, the final > re sponse . . . > > > For Christs sake Jami get off his back! > He does not clutter up the list, he provides much needed helpful > advice and > support. > You are the only twit cluttering up this list lately. > > !plonk! <-- the sound of JaMi being added to my email kill filter file. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: JaMi Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, 19 February 2002 4:55 PM > > To: Protel EDA Forum > > Cc: JaMi Smith; JaMi OC > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Writing messages all day . . . hopefully, > > the final > > response . . . > > > > > > Abdul, > > > > Thanks for coming clean on your interests in buying and selling Protel > > Licenses, as it clarifies a lot on why you have attempted to > > justify the > > raises in price by Protel. It also explains why you appear to > > be a Protel > > "shill". You're just trying th hustle your own 'product' (the > > "licenses" you > > own). > > > > Please however, stop doing it here, because while it may be > > good for your > > "business", it is in fact counter productive to the interests > > of Protel > > customers and users as a whole, and it clutters up the list, and as I > > thought I made perfectly clear before, it is sending the > > wrong message to > > Protel / Altium. > > > > While I will admit that you do appear to have been using > > Protel for a long > > time, and therefore appear to be pretty knowledgeable about the Protel > > product, and in that respect I am sure that I could learn a > > few things from > > you, please keep in mind that being a "cad jockey", or more > > specifically a > > "Protel jockey", and being a good designer are not in fact > > the same thing. > > > > You really don't get it, do you? You are in fact new to the game. As a > > designer, who claims to have been in the business since 1976, > > you really > > don't seem to have learned much about design. > > > > Please also stop using this forum as a place to talk (write) > > just to here > > yourself talk. Contribute where you can but, but please stop > > acting like it > > is the "Ask Abdul" show. Believe it or not, it really is > > counter productive > > for the list in general. > > > > Oh, and by the way, while at TRW in 1983, I was responsible > > for driving one > > CAD company, Design Aids Inc., into Chapter 11, and putting > > them out of > > business, because they thought they didn't have to support > > their customers. > > But that's another story. > > > > Yes, in fact there really is legal precedent, but you don't > > really expect us > > to think that besides being the worlds best designer, that > > you now also > > understand consumer protection law as well do you? > > Why counselor, I didn't know. > > > > Also please, you also should stop trying to talk down to > > everyone in your > > manner of speech, as it too is counter productive. And don't > > even think that > > you have a chance at winning a battle of wits, because you don't. > > > > You really do miss the whole point don't you Abdul? You > > really may have all > > day to sit around and write messages, but the point is that > > the rest of us > > really don't have all day to sit around and read them, let > > alone respond! > > > > Let's dispense with the BS, which truly is counter productive > > to the list, > > and try to get back on course, which I believe is solving the > > problems that > > users are having with Protel, and getting Protel to address the real > > problems that are out there, and support their customers, > > rather than trying > > to justify a price increase. > > > > JaMi > > > > P.S. I am not sure whether you would like me to address you as Abdul, > > Dennis, or Lomax, but my name is JaMi, and I would request > > you address me > > that way. > > > > You really don't need to respond any further, as it really is > > all down hill > > from here. > > > > * * * > > > > ---- Original Message ----- > > From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 4:59 PM > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Writing messages all day . . . the response . . . > > > > > > > warning: a long response to a long post, not directly > > related to support. > > > > > > At 06:40 PM 2/17/2002 -0800, JaMi Smith wrote: > > > >Unfortunately, herein lies what I perceive to be one of > > the problems, > > which > > > >already has been partially acknowledged and addressed, in > > that when the > > > >list, or more precisely the size and content of the posts, > > as well as the > > > >number of posts to the list, becomes such that the average > > subscriber to > > the > > > >list cannot keep up with the list due to the overwhelming > > number of post, > > or > > > >the vast amount of extraneous matter in some of the posts, > > then the list > > > >has in fact defeated it's purpose, and the community as a whole can > > suffer. > > > > > > It does not directly suffer from the volume of posts, > > because no user is > > > forced to actually read the posts. Some simply let mail > > accumulate, and > > > then search it later when they have questions. Disk space > > is cheap. But if > > > one thinks that one must read everything, then, yes, one will have a > > > problem as the list grows. > > > > > > >If one person unsubscrbes from this list, because he or > > she doesn't have > > the > > > >time to sort thru the extra clutter to find the answers > > that they need, > > or > > > >the pearls of knowledge and wisdom that will make their > > job easier, then > > > >those responsible for the content of the list have in fact done a > > tremendous > > > >disservice to the community. > > > > > > I'd say that this is greatly overstated. If one is looking > > for answers, > > > then one asks, one is not forced to go through tons of > > clutter. One can > > > simply watch the thread of one's question. I use Eudora for > > e-mail, and I > > > can press the Subject button, to sort by Subject, and it > > knows that Re: > > > Subject is the same as Subject. > > > > > > When a question is asked, responses usually come in fairly > > quickly. One > > can > > > tell from the subject lines if they relate to one's question or not. > > > Reading other mail is *voluntary.* I routinely skip over > > some posts when I > > > see that they are off-topic and I'm not particularly interested. > > > > > > >I for one think that the list is approaching critical > > mass, and rather > > than > > > >try and sort thru all of the content to find what is of > > value, and what > > is > > > >superfluous, or simply ignoring new posts when I don't > > have the time to > > look > > > >at them at all, I chose to address the issue in a manner > > that I thought > > > >would be the most productive and least offensive way that I could. > > > > > > It would have been better to directly address the issues. > > There are a > > > number of problems with the list as it is constituted. I > > recount these not > > > to blame anyone but simply to examine the issues. > > > > > > (1) Subject lines are frequently not descriptive. > > > (2) There is a lot of duplication. Many questions are asked > > which were > > > answered perhaps several days before. > > > (3) Off-topic posts are intermingled with the rest of the list. > > > > > > Techserv attempted to solve the third problem by opening > > the Open Topic > > > Forum, without much success; it could have been predicted. > > Besides the > > fact > > > that an open topic forum already existed, > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], one never knows if the > > persons with > > whom > > > one might be having a discussion are subscribed to Open > > Topic. We have no > > > idea who subscribes to Open Topic except for the few who have posted > > there, > > > which brings us to a central problem: this list is managed > > by Techserv > > > according to its own lights, and the users are typically > > not consulted, > > nor > > > are we informed. It is interesting that Mr. Smith brings up > > issues of > > > conflict of interest, below, without seeming to realize > > that there are > > > major issues involving Techserv itself and its management > > of this list. > > > > > > They have done well enough that we have not actually moved the > > > association's support to another list, but we have found, > > in the past, > > that > > > we may spend a lot of effort to propose paths for the growth and > > > development of the list, and they go nowhere. Techserv is > > not interested > > in > > > user involvement in the list management, that is clear. > > > > > > >I have in fact, in recent weeks, written several very long > > and specific > > > >replies to several posts , but decided that any one of > > them might be too > > > >offensive to post to the list, or even to send directly to > > any specific > > > >individual, since I think that the last thing that this > > user community > > needs > > > >is a war of words between any of its contributors. > > > > > > It takes two to make a war, otherwise one person ends up > > looking pretty > > > foolish, all by himself.... > > > > > > >But I did reach the limit of my tolerance the other night, > > when, after a > > > >very long and productive day, I decided to quickly check > > my email before > > > >leaving for home. A simple glance in the lower left corner > > of Outlook to > > see > > > >the number of new (unread) posts to this list (which Outlook > > automatically > > > >sorts upon receipt into a separate folder), and then > > simply sorting those > > by > > > >sender and doing a little counting, quickly provided the > > statistics for > > the > > > >days posts, all of which took less than a minute. Yes, it > > did take a few > > > >more minutes to cut and paste the list together, but I > > figured that it > > would > > > >be a quick and easy way to broach the problem in a manner > > that would not > > be > > > >too offensive, and see what sort of responses I could get > > from the other > > > >members of the list. > > > > > > Yes, compiling those statistics need not be much work. It > > was a bit of a > > > cheap shot for us to point out the possible contradiction > > to Mr. Smith. I > > > mentioned the time taken simply to point out that this > > thread is itself > > > off-topic. There is actually another place to discuss list > > policy, and it > > > is the association list. While the association does not > > directly control > > > this list, it does have the power to move elsewhere if association > > > decisions are not respected. But the association has made > > no decisions > > that > > > would test this, and the sense has been that it would not > > be productive to > > > force a confrontation. > > > > > > The work which Techserv did to found this list and to run > > it when that was > > > a burden has been acknowledged with gratitude by the > > association, and > > would > > > continue to be acknowledged. > > > > > > However, major changes are to take place with this list, it > > is likely that > > > the list will be moved elsewhere, so that the association > > can directly > > > implement decisions without going through a rather opaque > > process with > > > Techserv. > > > > > > The association list is > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] It was > > > founded to be a means of making association decisions, and > > a number of > > > decisions have been made. The association has not been > > directly active of > > > late, but I am sure that anyone coming in with proposals > > would be answered > > > and there is a mechanism for actually making decisions, > > something that > > does > > > not exist here (other than appeal to the list > > administrator, who makes all > > > decisions according to his own opinion, which might or might not be > > > satisfactory to the majority.) > > > > > > >Well, as I said before, I think that most of what needs to > > be said has > > > >already been said, and been said in a much less offensive > > manner that I > > > >could have said it myself. I would point out however, for some self > > > >appointed experts (who according to some of the responses > > to my post may > > in > > > >fact have gained much of their "expertise" by reading this list or > > > >contributing to the list and waiting to be corrected), > > > > > > I feel sorry for Mr. Smith. > > > > > > > that there are in > > > >fact people on this list who actually have been in the > > industry for much > > > >more than 25 years, and in fact predate MIL STD 275 > > revision D, Bishop > > > >Graphics, Red and Blue Tape (and it's proper use), rats > > nests (both real > > and > > > >those contrived here in this list), multilayer boards, > > plated thru holes, > > > >and even "Computer Aided Design" in any and all of its > > forms, and most of > > > >the systems that any form of CAD runs on. > > > > > > Such as myself, if I am correct. 275D was issued in April 1978 and I > > > designed my first boards in something like 1976. > > > > > > >There is one specific area that has not been discussed, > > and which I feel > > > >needs to be discussed for the overall good of the user > > community, and > > that > > > >is the issue of personal or economic bias, and the issue > > of unsolicited > > and > > > >unwarranted comments regarding the performance (or lack thereof) or > > Protel > > > >Products.. > > > > > > > >Let me preface this by the fact that this list is supposed to be an > > > >Association of Protel EDA ***===>>> USERS <<<===*** ("A > > Virtual User > > > > Group"), where: The group functions in two modes: > > > >1. Use of this web page to learn and inform others. > > > >2. Use of the email forums for immediate two way communication > > > >For new members, this web site serves as a starting point > > to join forums. > > > >[AND FURTHER] It also provides advertising for Protel > > related products, > > > >services, and employment. > > > >(SEE => http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/index.html). > > > > > > That is Techserv's statement of purpose for the list. It > > was written years > > > ago, it was the work of one person who did not consult any > > association. > > But > > > it is true, to be sure, that this is a list for Protel > > users. However, we > > > would wish that Protel *employees* also participated, > > though I certainly > > > understand why it would be company policy that they do not. > > > > > > >Respecting the latter; "advertising for Protel related products, > > services, > > > >and employment;" I cannot believe that it was the intent > > of the list > > > >moderator that such "advertising" should be done without proper > > > >identification and notification. > > > > > > Mr. Smith does seem to be a tad confused here. The > > statement he quoted is > > > from a description of a "virtual user group" and its web > > site, operated by > > > Techserv. Techserv has not encouraged the use of this list for > > advertising. > > > I did once check the advertising policy and get a quote > > (Techserv sells > > > advertising for this list, but only once has an ad actually > > appeared here, > > > as I recall.). The price was not affordable for what I had in mind > > > (advertising broker services for used licenses; one > > insertion would have > > > cost almost as much as one sale would yield in commission, > > and sales of > > > used licenses are few and far between). > > > > > > >To be blunt Abdul, in much of what you say in this forum > > (consisting of > > this > > > >list and other closely related lists), you appear to be a > > "Shill" for > > > >Protel., and many of your comments seem to gloss over or > > at least attempt > > to > > > >minimize many severe problems with Protel. > > > > > > That's an opinion. It's not one which might be held by > > Protel employees. I > > > do, however, have a different style in approaching problems > > with Protel. I > > > wish to *support* Protel in making changes that will > > benefit itself as > > well > > > as the users. In doing this, I do not treat them as a bunch of > > > ill-intentioned, ignorant incompetents, or as evil-minded > > marketers, as > > > seems to be the wont of some critics. > > > > > > Instead of merely griping about some problem with Protel, I > > attempt to > > > explain -- if possible -- *why* the program has that > > deficiency, why it > > may > > > not yet have been corrected -- i.e., the etiology of the bug and its > > > persistence -- instead of purely blaming Protel, while at > > the same time I > > > often point out that the problem could have been solved > > years earlier. > > > Protel can be improved, and user involvement is crucial in this. > > > > > > When I joined this list, Protel was somewhat of an > > embattled company with > > > respect to its users; the list was full of outrage. I > > attempted to change > > > that. I have lots of evidence that I was successful, among > > them Protel > > > 99SE, long-time readers of this list will know how > > effective user input > > was > > > in giving direction to the SE release. But I also know what Protel > > > employees have told me. (One man, very highly placed in the > > company, said, > > > "You should never have to pay for a Protel license again, > > at the very > > least.") > > > > > > But was I paid for this? No. (And I have received no free > > software from > > > Protel that was not given to others under similar conditions. I.e., > > CAMtastic.) > > > > > > >When one goes to www.lomaxdesign.com, we find that "LOMAX DESIGN > > > > CONSULTANTS" provides "Protel design consulting, training and > > support.", > > > >and also "Protel license resale support". > > > > > > Right. I wear a number of hats. "Design consulting" is a > > fancy name for > > > printed circuit design. "Training and support" is mostly > > pie-in-the-sky, > > > though two users have hired me by the hour to guide them > > through their > > > first designs. I think they were satisfied. One came back > > for more, the > > > other, *at my encouragement*, found this list and uses it > > frequently. > > > > > > Some time back I noticed that Protel users sometimes had > > licenses to sell, > > > and these licenses were going for cheap. That seemed > > strange to me, since > > a > > > "used" Protel license is every bit as good as a new one. > > The problem was, > > > if I saw it correctly, that resales had a bit of a bad > > reputation, buyers > > > did not trust that they would not get burned. If someone with a good > > > reputation would start brokering these licenses, buyers > > *and* sellers > > would > > > benefit. Ahem. > > > > > > I have made a few thousand dollars over the last two years > > or so. It is > > > very small potatoes, since few Protel users want to sell > > their licenses. > > > Right now, there is one user who would like to sell, but Protel has > > mangled > > > the used license market with a barrage of "sales" and > > "specials" and the > > > ATS announcement and all the uncertainty over upgrade > > costs. Used licenses > > > were going for about 25% off of full price until all this. > > But the sale > > > meant that one would pay only a tiny bit more for a new > > license including > > ATS. > > > > > > >Further, when we look at one of your responses to another > > responses to my > > > >original post, you specifically admit that "Protel support > > through this > > > >list, as well as providing other services for Protel > > users, some of which > > > >are for compensation, *is* [your] business" > > > > > > Yes. That is, it is a part of my business. The primary > > business is printed > > > circuit design. By providing support to users, I keep my > > name present, and > > > thus companies needing design support might call me. If a > > few do, it does > > > not take many, the time I have spent here is well worth it. > > > > > > I should also mention that I have done one small piece of > > work for Protel, > > > I wrote a guide to something or other, and I was paid, as I > > recall, about > > > $300 to $400. I might do more writing for them, there has > > been talk of it. > > > But I would prefer to move toward what I would call "user resource > > > facilitator." I think Protel needs such a person. So I > > *might* become a > > > Protel employee or paid consultant. But anyone who thinks > > that my writing > > > here has been influenced by some reluctance to criticize > > Protel has simply > > > not been paying attention. I've said plenty of things on > > this list that > > > might lead some Protel executives to dislike me. > > > > > > It appears that there may be divisions within the company as to > > philosophy, > > > and I don't know which faction has the upper hand. What > > goes on internally > > > within Protel is not very much visible to me, I have only hints from > > > occasional conversations and correspondence. > > > > > > Let's say that I stand for the concept that a company > > benefits when it > > > makes the benefit of its customers high in its list of > > priorities, when it > > > avoids short-term profit at its customers' expense. Some > > elements within > > > the company might think that ... insufficiently focused on > > stockholder > > > profits. In reality, however, stockholders, in a sound > > economy, are in > > > stock for the long haul, and thus will benefit from a long > > view. It is > > more > > > officers of the company who might benefit from short-term > > profit, a kind > > of > > > conflict of interest, the evil effects of which we are now > > seeing with > > Enron. > > > > > > >I believe that this, especially in light of your defensive > > posture on > > many > > > >of Protel problems and issues, gives me the right to ask , > > on behalf of > > the > > > >entire user community represented in this (and related) > > list, that you > > fully > > > >and completely disclose just exactly what your specific > > relationship to > > > >Protel and/or Altium in fact is. > > > > > > I think I've done that. Any questions remaining? > > > > > > >The bottom line is this: Protel and/or Altium personnel, both from > > > >management and/or technical support, obviously monitor > > this (and related) > > > >list(s), on a regular basis, in an attempt to keep their > > finger on the > > > >"pulse" (as it were) of the Protel User Community. > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > >Every time you wax eloquent and philosophize on how Protel > > is God's gift > > to > > > >PCB Design and act as if it is perfect and was "sent down > > from heaven", > > > > > > Actually, I think it would be much better if it were sent > > down. No, Protel > > > is the product of human labor and shows the marks of that. > > I.e., it isn't > > > perfect. Together, though, we could make it *much* better, > > better than > > > Altium could manage on its own. > > > > > > > and > > > >further, that we should all appreciate the fact that we > > are so blessed to > > be > > > >able to actually use Protel, > > > > > > I feel blessed, yes. I have used other CAD systems. I have not used > > Allegro > > > or Mentor, but I have reason to believe that they would not > > necessarily be > > > better for my applications. > > > > > > Remember, I paid for my Protel license out of my own > > pocket. It was the > > > best money I ever spent. > > > > > > > I think you step over the line and actually > > > >perform a disservice to the community by covering up the > > real problems > > and > > > >giving a false picture to Protel and/or Altium. I believe > > that this is > > > >especially true in light of the apparent conflicts of interest. > > > > > > The conflicts I have, such as they are, are those which any > > user would > > have > > > if he were (1) a design consultant or contractor using > > Protel for clients > > > and/or (2) helping users to resell licenses (a secondary > > and very minor > > > item for me). All of which has been quite open and visible. > > > > > > >An example of this would be your advocated position on the > > limitation of > > > >support and service to a short duration from the time of > > the purchase of > > > >Protel, where in reality, not only ethically, but legally > > as well, where > > > >there is a legitimate problem with Protel (as in a > > legitimate "bug"), > > Protel > > > >is obligated to fix the problem (especially when you > > consider the cost of > > > >the product), irregardless of how many new releases or > > service packs (or > > > >years) it takes. > > > > > > Mr. Smith appears to be under some level of delusion > > regarding the law. He > > > may want to see that, but it (1) hasn't been the case for > > any software and > > > (2) isn't going to be the case. The cost of the product is legally > > irrelevant. > > > > > > Further, I have not "advocated" that Protel not fix old bugs. I have > > merely > > > noted that, at some point, they stop supporting a release. > > Typically this > > > has been after a year or perhaps a few years. This is not > > new, nor is it > > > unusual. If Mr. Smith thinks I am incorrect, and that what > > is absolutely > > > common and usual behavior in the software industry, perhaps > > he could cite > > > some law or legal precedent. > > > > > > [...] > > > >The bottom line is this, Protel, as a product, still has some very > > serious > > > >shortcommings and serious problems, > > > > > > Serious, yes. Very serious starts to become overstatement. > > The worst thing > > > I know about is blind and buried via display behavior, and > > technically > > that > > > is not a bug (but the lack of an important feature). The > > router obviously > > > needs improvement, but, again, you get what you pay for. > > > > > > > and the only way that any of them are > > > >going to get addressed is by calling a bug a bug and holding Protel > > > >accountable to it's users, which I believe is at least one > > of the primary > > > >functions of this list. > > > > > > Not a stated one, to be sure. Techserv's strict rules -- mostly > > unenforced, > > > a problem with rules that are overstrict with a population > > of engineers -- > > > would limit the list to the provision of support, i.e., how > > do we do this > > > or is this a bug and what is a workaround, getting the job > > done kind of > > > stuff. Ragging on Protel/Altium does not fit that. But this > > brings us back > > > to how the list is managed. I'd have sublists, with users > > subscribed to > > > *all* by default, and they can unsubscribe from some of > > them if they wish. > > > Once there is a *place* to do what users want to do, and > > which will reach > > > the majority of users except for those who opt out, it would become > > > reasonable to expect users to follow some discipline about > > where they > > post. > > > Under present circumstances, this list is pretty much *it*. > > > > > > (There are other ways to accomplish this, such as defined > > abbreviations in > > > the Subject line so that users can filter, but a family of > > lists would be > > > very simple to administer and it requires no special software, etc. > > > Actually, we have the family of lists, it is the > > protel-users family of > > > lists on yahoogroups. But because it has been opt-in > > instead of opt-out, > > it > > > would not work any better than this list, so if we were to > > move, if we had > > > the subscription list, I'd vote to automatically subscribe > > everyone to all > > > the association lists, with a very easy way to opt out of > > individual lists > > > being give to each user. New users, likewise, would be > > subscribed to all > > > the lists by default. Another advantage of this -- like the > > subject line > > > solution -- is that it would become simple to move a > > discussion to another > > > list without losing the participants, assuming that most users would > > > subscribe to all the lists. I would, even if I weren't in > > the position > > that > > > I am in. The accessory lists will always have much less > > traffic, so there > > > is little reason to unsubscribe from them. And if that > > changes, it is > > > simple to fix.) > > > > > > >In short Abdul, you have contributed immensely to this > > list, and don't > > for a > > > >minute even think that I am trying to sell you short on that issue, > > because > > > >I am not. But since I have joined this list, over 1 in > > every 8 post to > > this > > > >list has been made by you, and as you seem to realize and > > acknowledge > > > >yourself, much of the extraneous verbiage contributed to > > this list is > > also > > > >from you, and as you yourself have already pointed out in > > your reply to a > > > >response to my original post, that is too much. > > > > > > Perhaps. 1 out of 8? I'd say that is wider participation than I had > > > thought. Given that I can afford to make a point to be here > > for support -- > > > which is the large bulk of what I do -- I'm glad to see > > that the ration is > > > that low. > > > > > > >In conclusion, I apologize to you Abdul if I have offended > > you. Please do > > > >continue to contribute to the list, as you are, and I am sure will > > continue > > > >to be, an immense help to many, but please at the same time, please > > disclose > > > >your actual relationship with Protel and/or Altium, and > > dispense with the > > > >unwarranted posturing and commentary [...] > > > > > > You know, when you have an employee, sometimes you have to > > take the bad > > > with the good. One makes a decision about keeping an > > employee based on > > > overall benefit or harm. But time will tell if my > > commentary is of benefit > > > or harm. > > > > > > >After all, as you have so conveniently pointed out yourself in your > > initial > > > >reply to a response to my original post, you are not in > > fact an actual > > > >"user" of Protel yourself (since you have "arranged for > > another very > > > >competent designer to do most of [your] design" for you) , > > and you really > > > >are fortunate enough to have a lot of extra free time on > > your hands. > > > > > > That is a misunderstanding. I am a user. It is just that > > the balance has > > > shifted, I now spend more time writing than I spend using for actual > > design > > > work (Obviously I use the software when I am writing, which > > has gotten > > much > > > easier with dual monitors). I don't consider this "free > > time." Rather, I > > > consider it an essential part of my job. I've got lots of > > other stuff to > > > do, which often suffers because I write. Maybe I will write > > less and do > > > some of these other things. But not because of Mr. Smith's critique, > > though > > > perhaps I may thank him for reminding me of certain things. > > Again, time > > > will tell. > > > > > > >Most importantly, as Bob Jones stated in his post in > > response to this > > issue, > > > >"For all of those who contribute to this forum, please do > > not stop! It's > > > >been a huge help". [...] > > > > > > And I intend to do what I can to make it even better. I do > > have ideas, > > some > > > of which might involve working more closely with Altium. > > Again, we'll see. > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Abdulrahman Lomax > > > Easthampton, Massachusetts USA > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
