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 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.
>
> Not sure what element of that was 'ad hominem', but if that's how you want
> to take it that is up to you.
The element that says "you"... "you"... some personality trait "you are
perverse" "you have an axe to grind".
That's ad hominem. If you have an issue with my argument, than address the
argument, not my person.
>
> >
> >>
> >> You clearly have no idea what Rocket does for the user group and
> despite
> >> being told that we can't take money but instead Rocket provides other
> >> resources with which we are very happy you still say 'where's the
> >> financial
> >> support?'
> >
> > Asked and answered. A group doesn't need to "take" money, in order to
> > "use" money. Address that.
> > Why doesn't Rocket have a budget earmarked "Money to be used to support
> the
> > U2 user group's activities?"
> > Why?
> >
>
> Why do you think Rocket doesn't have a budget earmarked for user group
> activities? You clearly have no idea what involvement they have in their
> user group.
Again it's not about their "involvement" only about their "financial"
involvement.
>
> >>
> >> Let's be clear about this - the support that we have asked for has been
> >> provided. There is nothing that we are being held back from doing due
> to
> >> lack of support from Rocket.
> >
> >
> > Then you need to ask for more. Clearly the current strategy is not
> > working.
> >
> Why ask for more, what would we do with it? What activities do you think
> the user group should be doing that are restricted by lack of money? We
> are a user group, not a body dedicated to marketing a technology.
>
Outreach. Outreach. and Outreach.
> >>
> >> What the group needs is not support from Rocket, we have that, it is
> the
> >> active participation of U2 users willing to put their time where their
> >> mouths are and contribute to what the group is doing. If you want to
> >> contribute start putting some ideas forward and volunteering time to
> put
> >> them into action.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Sure let's continue a strategy that doesn't work. That is a great
> > marketing approach.
> >
> > On your next point, I volunteer more time to promote MV than most. I'm
> not
> > willing at all, to promote Rocket at the expense of other MV Vendors, as
> a
> > volunteer with no support from Rocket themselves.
> >
> > Clearly you have no idea what I do, or what I've been doing.
> > Maybe you should figure that out first, before you go spouting off about
> > what you think I should be doing.
> >
>
> I have no idea who you are, you hide behind a meaningless name -
> ft2...@aol.com - you could be anyone. OK, so you don't want to promote
> Rocket, let's remember that this is a U2 user group we are talking about.
> It's not a Pick user group, an MV user group, a jbase user group, an
> Intersystems user group. It is U2, that is Rocket and Rocket support
> their
> own user group.
>
> It sounds to me like you are someone whose involvement in MV has a bias
> towards the non-U2 side, that is your choice but have you discussed with
> anyone at Rocket what their strategy is? Do you have any information
> about
> what they are doing?
>
> U2 is sold OEM, license numbers are growing, revenues are growing, ISVs
> are
> prospering. OK, so there are less companies doing their own in house
> development, but that is the way the market is moving. Today it is
> increasingly about selling applications, not databases or development
> tools
> and as a specialist at selling OEM that is good for Rocket and U2. So you
> think it's a strategy that doesn't work, well that's your choice, but you
> probably have no sight of sales figures, no idea of licenses sold, no
> information on which to make that judgment.
>
My name is not meaningless.
And there is a difference between what the *group* does and what *I* do.
I do not have an bias away from U2, or toward anything non-U2.
I see no point in discussing with "anyone at Rocket" what their strategy
is, since my entire point is, outreach.
Outreach is not inreach. If I have to contact them, that's not outreach is
it?
To your claim that "license numbers are growing" I have to respond
{{fact}}.
I've seen no evidence of that. What's your evidence.
If you want to demonstrate your claims, than do so with sources.
Anyone can make claims. I can claim just as easily that everything you've
said is exactly upside-down.
Claims are not worth the air into which they are propelled.
W
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
