Tony
As always, you make some good points.
I think maybe we I was wrong to talk about 'marketing' - a better word would
have been 'awareness'. That's what we (U2UG) have to get to grips with, and
haven't yet.
One of the questions I hear all too often - and I'm sure others on the list
do as well
On 15/03/2011 20:04, fft2...@aol.com fft2...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/15/2011 5:10:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
br...@brianleach.co.uk writes:
Plus of course, since we don't charge
fees, we don't have any budget to advertise our presence!
Why isn't Rocket themselves giving a
Dan raise some interesting questions and I thought I would put down some answer
below to the points he raised. However the issue here is not the effectiveness
of the board, but we as a community. After a number of years as second fiddle
through Informix and IBM, we have all developed a siege
In a message dated 3/18/2011 4:24:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
george.l...@aptsolutions.net writes:
A big part of the reason is that the user group is not a properly
constituted organisation in the sense of being a corporation or other
legal
entity that can hold money. Whilst
Not relevant.
Rocket can provide a *budget* item, which the U2UG could *direct* without
the U2UG ever actually holding the money.
Speaking as a member of the U2 user group board I think I represent the
views of the whole board when I say that we have no issues whatsoever with
the support
In a message dated 3/18/2011 10:23:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
george.l...@aptsolutions.net writes:
Speaking as a member of the U2 user group board I think I represent the
views of the whole board when I say that we have no issues whatsoever with
the support that we receive from Rocket.
On 18/03/2011 17:53, fft2...@aol.com fft2...@aol.com wrote:
Any group is only as effective as the resources they have at their
disposal, including money. So yes, without money I'm going to be pointing
fingers
at Rocket to ask, where's the financial support Rocket?
Are you being
In a message dated 3/18/2011 1:02:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
george.l...@aptsolutions.net writes:
Are you being deliberately perverse or do you have some axe to grind with
Rocket?
Yes be sure to throw an ad hominem attack in there to try to convince the
reading audience not to listen.
On 18/03/2011 21:49, fft2...@aol.com fft2...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/18/2011 1:02:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
george.l...@aptsolutions.net writes:
Are you being deliberately perverse or do you have some axe to grind with
Rocket?
Yes be sure to throw an ad hominem attack
In a message dated 3/18/2011 3:34:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
george.l...@aptsolutions.net writes:
On 18/03/2011 21:49, fft2...@aol.com fft2...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/18/2011 1:02:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
george.l...@aptsolutions.net writes:
Are you being
I learned about the I-Beam of Interpersonal Communications at a ToastMasters
meeting.
The idea is to stop using the word you altogether. Easier said than done.
The beauty of the I-Beam is that it removes blaming others.
Thus...
I wish that Rocket would see that 123 and then did
Bill:
My wife has reminded me of this fact for years!I hardly know what
the word you means anymore. :-)
Bill
On 3/18/2011 5:14 PM, Bill Brutzman wrote:
I learned about the I-Beam of Interpersonal Communications at
Good point, Bill,
I think one sometimes uses you when one means someone other than themselves,
without intending to pin the reader with the crime being mentioned. The
English language does not differentiate plural, general you from singular,
specific you (unless you're from the deep south, in
Hi Bill,
First, I believe what you say. I just find it hard to accept that
ToastMasters, a fine and well-respected organization, would want
everyone to always say I, and never say you. Personally, if someone
I was dealing with constantly said I this and I that, I would tune
them out very
14 matches
Mail list logo
