Hi Jeff and Ian,
I would like to respond to this post from Jeff - I have also read your
responce and his responce to that expaining his points. But I am on a
little bit of a rant because of this post.
So Jeff you can take this with a grain of salt also. But everyones
grains are adding up in my opinon and my wounds aren't healing.
First I believe Ians attempt to put this on a website was a very good
Idea. I am a very visual person and the relationship view is something that
would help me tremendously. With the link embeded in his post you can
easily go to the website and see that. In your example of the supermarket
he is standing next to the board while you are reading it. If he asked you
to download the text and graphic then it might be as you suggested.
If a person does not want to go to the website then skip his post and
not work with it. It is as easy as that.
This actually bring up something that I have noticed about your posts.
You never include what the person has said before. So in Ians case that
would not matter. But I find it annoying because I would rather look at the
reponces first and have the problem stated there instead of haveing to click
through all the previous posts. You make me do more work <g>
Another thing I think everyone needs to do a little better, and that is
reading and responding to what the person is saying and trying at least to
interpret what they are trying to get accross. In this case you explained
the accepted procedure of replying to the group, but you did not acknowledge
that he said that. If you missed that then you wern't reading, if you saw
that then you should have also included, because you could interpret why he
said you could respond to him by email, (because if you visited the website
and he had included a download) that an email responce is better if you
include an attached file in a responce, because (and I am not sure the
correct answer - that the group doesn't alow attachments and/or that most
people won't download an attached file).
I also thing that the stament "need more information is needed" is not
really an appropriate responsse:
First if you respond to that and have no suggestions then the post
might not get looked at by someone who knows the answer. I know that one
person who is an MVP has stated that he really only reviews things that have
not been responded to.
Second - There are times that you can answer the question. It may
be a suggestion that there are multiple ways to do it but "You whould do it
this way:" And:
Sometimes you have to interpret what is the probable situation. In one
post on 10/14 'Plotting advanced database Relationships" ther was a table
for products that had the same name, flavor, but different price and
barcode. With no other information about the product. So I had to
interpret that the probable situation here was that the product was a
differnent size, or from a different company. Instead of responding with
"Need more information" - If either of these were not the answer then I
would assume the person would respond back or at least have enough
information to go ahead on their own with the advice I had given.
That's it, my 2 cents worth, JMHO, sorry if it offends you,
Craig Hornish
[email protected] - so I can delete it when it becomes a spam magnet
"Think outside the box, because anything is possible."
"How long it will take or whether it requires divine intervention is another
issue"
