Re: data set deletion problem

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

On Tue, 31 May 2022 13:00:58 +, Peter Relson  wrote:


As far as I know, XCFAS would not allocate any data set other than what XCF 
itself needs (perhaps some sort of couple data set)


IMHO XCF is used to allocated LNKLST datasets and I believe it is not 
because XCF needs them.
And there is a way to unallocate LNKLST datasets in order to perform 
some tasks.



--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: data set deletion problem

[Joe Monk]

Radoslaw,


It's not good to argue with the guy who writes z/OS for ibm how it works.

Joe

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022, 06:50 Radoslaw Skorupka  wrote:

> > On Tue, 31 May 2022 13:00:58 +, Peter Relson 
> wrote:
> >
> >> As far as I know, XCFAS would not allocate any data set other than what
> XCF itself needs (perhaps some sort of couple data set)
>
> IMHO XCF is used to allocated LNKLST datasets and I believe it is not
> because XCF needs them.
> And there is a way to unallocate LNKLST datasets in order to perform
> some tasks.
>
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Lodz, Poland
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Bill Johnson]

First off, I didn’t say YOU were a disgruntled ex IBM worker. Just that there 
are a plethora of them. IBM was even sued by some over the years. Age 
discrimination, if I’m not mistaken was a big reason. Which could explain why 
so many here are anti IBM.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, June 6, 2022, 12:21 AM, g...@gabegold.com  wrote:

I left IBM in 1971 after working there three years. It was a great first job 
and I left on wonderful terms, was invited to return after getting real-world 
(that is, customer) experience. Three years, of course, meant that IBM's 
pension plan/benefits weren't relevant to me. I got plenty of customer -- and 
then ISV -- experience though neglected to return. But as a customer and then 
ISV executive I had a rewarding decades-long relationship with IBM, including, 
for a few years, editing and writing a technology magazine for them. So 
speculating that I'm in any way motivated as a disgruntled ex-IBMer is 
laughable.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: data set deletion problem

[Radoslaw Skorupka]

Joe,
I know who Peter is, however I also know that XCFAS is keeping LNKLST 
datasets allocated. It is not matter of opinion or conviction, it is a 
fact, easy to check.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland





W dniu 06.06.2022 o 13:08, Joe Monk pisze:

Radoslaw,


It's not good to argue with the guy who writes z/OS for ibm how it works.

Joe

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022, 06:50 Radoslaw Skorupka  wrote:


On Tue, 31 May 2022 13:00:58 +, Peter Relson 

wrote:

As far as I know, XCFAS would not allocate any data set other than what

XCF itself needs (perhaps some sort of couple data set)

IMHO XCF is used to allocated LNKLST datasets and I believe it is not
because XCF needs them.
And there is a way to unallocate LNKLST datasets in order to perform
some tasks.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: data set deletion problem

[Seymour J Metz]

First, Peter is in a much better posiotion than you or I to know how the code 
works.

Second, the ENQ for LNKLSTxx members is permanent; only dynamically allocated 
LNKLST datasets can be unallocated.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Radoslaw Skorupka [r.skoru...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 6:50 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: data set deletion problem

> On Tue, 31 May 2022 13:00:58 +, Peter Relson  wrote:
>
>> As far as I know, XCFAS would not allocate any data set other than what XCF 
>> itself needs (perhaps some sort of couple data set)

IMHO XCF is used to allocated LNKLST datasets and I believe it is not
because XCF needs them.
And there is a way to unallocate LNKLST datasets in order to perform
some tasks.


--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Seymour J Metz]

Some common clients are very limited on what criteria you can request.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Ed 
Jaffe [edja...@phoenixsoftware.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2022 11:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Don't feed the trolls

On 6/5/2022 6:07 AM, Bob Bridges wrote:
> Anyway I'm told that for those who prefer some more thorough response, 
> there's a sort of BLOCK command that's easy enough to implement.

Not a "block" per se, but any desktop mail client can be configured with
mail filters to direct a message from your Inbox to some other place.

You can send it straight to the Trash if you like.


--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://secure-web.cisco.com/14Cd8RSONP8ElhnhCL_PzcwjMdW2uQtPX6_gQtV2cPU5ea5CSd3_SZ3fV6mgiv3W3NyCBDrxDwQskfqrNcpZ9JWGsOyR79W2rZg3dXviYKnVOC56tZFtzwrihw58MqqpqN0xFMb39MKgiUauFmkanuEMfc0ROhJGYHofopS1xEcJLcd4wLx3_s-gRWGlRaa1pYNleVEUzc1wS2iyHTNJnSQxOzwg5Llz79GixloBL5W_K8vfiN4k5r9ahLJ4iZG0vRgIhtUp1KocnCHX95L5HwA7JK3bW8T2mbeD5UzRLL-suPua7ShdeqPz0vI3RjQzHIXPSk_Y6iEIiX_iHwE41UQViV_pgvtVoqlO6xaZFH0EVAr7Lwrf9LlekqbV5shk5CCwMXvhHIOgmYI4r1ertZJ-8GLArnmS4FuRtlZ1VqJGclE7fYdTzRPBbyvD3kGJ_/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.phoenixsoftware.com%2F



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Seymour J Metz]

Please stop claiming that text says more than it actually says. The word 
"ordered" does not mean that IBM will actualy pay anything. Given the presence 
of sealed motions, I doubt that anybody on the list is in a posiiion to make 
more than an educated guess about the final outcome. Even with knowledge of all 
the facts in the case predictions would be dicey because of, e.g., excluded 
evidence. The only prediction that I would make is that the appeal process will 
be complicated, expensive and long.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Friday, June 3, 2022 3:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

Saying it will or won’t be overturned is just as silly as insinuating IBM will 
now hand over 1.6 billion at this stage of the proceedings. Yet, the headline 
states and the OP assumes exactly that. Gleefully I might add.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Friday, June 3, 2022, 3:09 PM, Tony Harminc  wrote:

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 at 14:16, Charles Mills  wrote:

> Well, #1 we are a bunch of jailhouse lawyers without even the source 
> documents in front of us. Who knows EXACTLY what IBM agreed, or how it is 
> effectively modified by the operation of law, or what exactly transpired 
> between IBM and AT&T.

Indeed. Anyone who has ever seen a program written by a lawyer may
appreciate this. I have seen a few (mostly but not entirely
spreadsheets), and it just reinforces my thinking that lawyers live in
a "differently logical" world from the rest of us. Many of us here
have all kinds of experience dealing with lawyers and contracts (to
say nothing of personal matters), but that kind of "legal experience"
doesn't make us lawyers or even experts.

Looked at another way, "legal reasoning" is a law school topic of
instruction and study, and is generally the thing that we programmers
take to because it most closely resembles programming, and we like to
think that the law is algorithmic in nature. But legal reasoning is
very far from being "the law", and is actually quite a small part of
the education of a lawyer. Applying it other people's cases to
conclude that this or that judgement is correct or will obviously be
overturned is just silly.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Seymour J Metz]

"The house is white on this side" (RAH, SIASL)


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Tony Harminc [t...@harminc.net]
Sent: Friday, June 3, 2022 3:09 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 at 14:16, Charles Mills  wrote:

> Well, #1 we are a bunch of jailhouse lawyers without even the source 
> documents in front of us. Who knows EXACTLY what IBM agreed, or how it is 
> effectively modified by the operation of law, or what exactly transpired 
> between IBM and AT&T.

Indeed. Anyone who has ever seen a program written by a lawyer may
appreciate this. I have seen a few (mostly but not entirely
spreadsheets), and it just reinforces my thinking that lawyers live in
a "differently logical" world from the rest of us. Many of us here
have all kinds of experience dealing with lawyers and contracts (to
say nothing of personal matters), but that kind of "legal experience"
doesn't make us lawyers or even experts.

Looked at another way, "legal reasoning" is a law school topic of
instruction and study, and is generally the thing that we programmers
take to because it most closely resembles programming, and we like to
think that the law is algorithmic in nature. But legal reasoning is
very far from being "the law", and is actually quite a small part of
the education of a lawyer. Applying it other people's cases to
conclude that this or that judgement is correct or will obviously be
overturned is just silly.

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Jay Maynard]

I don't remember anyone claiming more than the article actually said.

Now can we please move along?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Bob Bridges]

Indeed.  I've long ago concluded that I DON'T KNOW what's going on behind
the scenes.  For example, we love to repeat horror stories about legal
decisions that have everyone exclaiming "miscarriage of justice" - but often
enough when I learn of some of the background details, I realize our
judgement isn't so obvious and inevitable after all.  That jury decision,
for instance, about the lady who sued MacDonald's after hot coffee landed in
her lap.  Or the infamous Klan-Nazi trial decision.  Heck, I've BEEN on
juries that came to decisions I felt the need to explain afterward.  So
nowadays when I hear of some inexplicable legal outcome, I tend to suppose
there are details I didn't know about.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The main thing we learn from a serious attempt to practise the Christian
virtues is that we fail.  If there was any idea that God had set us a sort
of exam and that we might get good marks by deserving them, that has to be
wiped out.  If there was any idea of a sort of bargain -- any idea that we
could perform our side of the contract and thus put God in our debts so that
it was up to Him, in mere justice, to perform his side -- that has to be
wiped out.  -C S Lewis, "Christian Behavior" */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 08:21

I doubt that anybody on the list is in a posiiion to make more than an
educated guess about the final outcome. Even with knowledge of all the facts
in the case predictions would be dicey because of, e.g., excluded evidence.
The only prediction that I would make is that the appeal process will be
complicated, expensive and long.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Seymour J Metz]

Be thankful that you don't know; I'd hate to be on a jury for a complex and 
long running case. 

But at least none of the evidence is likely to be traumatic. Serve on a Federal 
grand jury and you may see things that you'd rather not.

Yeah, McDonald's looks different once you know that they were warned that the 
coffee was well above industry standard temperature and that there were prior 
injuries.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 8:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

Indeed.  I've long ago concluded that I DON'T KNOW what's going on behind
the scenes.  For example, we love to repeat horror stories about legal
decisions that have everyone exclaiming "miscarriage of justice" - but often
enough when I learn of some of the background details, I realize our
judgement isn't so obvious and inevitable after all.  That jury decision,
for instance, about the lady who sued MacDonald's after hot coffee landed in
her lap.  Or the infamous Klan-Nazi trial decision.  Heck, I've BEEN on
juries that came to decisions I felt the need to explain afterward.  So
nowadays when I hear of some inexplicable legal outcome, I tend to suppose
there are details I didn't know about.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The main thing we learn from a serious attempt to practise the Christian
virtues is that we fail.  If there was any idea that God had set us a sort
of exam and that we might get good marks by deserving them, that has to be
wiped out.  If there was any idea of a sort of bargain -- any idea that we
could perform our side of the contract and thus put God in our debts so that
it was up to Him, in mere justice, to perform his side -- that has to be
wiped out.  -C S Lewis, "Christian Behavior" */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 08:21

I doubt that anybody on the list is in a posiiion to make more than an
educated guess about the final outcome. Even with knowledge of all the facts
in the case predictions would be dicey because of, e.g., excluded evidence.
The only prediction that I would make is that the appeal process will be
complicated, expensive and long.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Matt Hogstrom]

This thread is getting tedious.  For those that are so inclined can you take 
your food fight to an e-mail thread outside of this list?  For one I’m not 
impressed with name calling, speculation and other forms of communication about 
something no one on this list knows about or can influence.  I understand 
people have opinions and that is fine but this has gone on too long and as a 
new mainframe looking at this list it looks like a flame war and not very 
professional.

Let’s step back, let it cool down for a few days and I suspect we’ll all 
breathe a sigh of relief.  I’m sure there will be new news items that will come 
up with new details and less speculation.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org

“Quantity has a quality all its own.”
— Joseph Stalin

> On Jun 6, 2022, at 9:13 AM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:
> 
> Be thankful that you don't know; I'd hate to be on a jury for a complex and 
> long running case. 
> 
> But at least none of the evidence is likely to be traumatic. Serve on a 
> Federal grand jury and you may see things that you'd rather not.
> 
> Yeah, McDonald's looks different once you know that they were warned that the 
> coffee was well above industry standard temperature and that there were prior 
> injuries.
> 
> 
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> 
> 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Carmen Vitullo]

Here here!

Reminds me of my grand kids, 5 and 9 years old arguing

Carmen


On 6/6/2022 8:22 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

This thread is getting tedious.  For those that are so inclined can you take 
your food fight to an e-mail thread outside of this list?  For one I’m not 
impressed with name calling, speculation and other forms of communication about 
something no one on this list knows about or can influence.  I understand 
people have opinions and that is fine but this has gone on too long and as a 
new mainframe looking at this list it looks like a flame war and not very 
professional.

Let’s step back, let it cool down for a few days and I suspect we’ll all 
breathe a sigh of relief.  I’m sure there will be new news items that will come 
up with new details and less speculation.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org

“Quantity has a quality all its own.”
— Joseph Stalin


On Jun 6, 2022, at 9:13 AM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Be thankful that you don't know; I'd hate to be on a jury for a complex and 
long running case.

But at least none of the evidence is likely to be traumatic. Serve on a Federal 
grand jury and you may see things that you'd rather not.

Yeah, McDonald's looks different once you know that they were warned that the 
coffee was well above industry standard temperature and that there were prior 
injuries.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
/I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to 
succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand 
with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, 
and part with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Mohammad Khan]

Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship. 
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar withhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect  
>which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Bill Johnson]

 I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment. What 
I've said about IBM is this.
1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like a 
baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable on the 
planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions. (all 
facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in April. Fact.5. 
The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my knowledge of the 
law.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan 
 wrote:  
 
 Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship. 
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar withhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect  
>which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Jay Maynard]

You've made your position abundantly clear, Bill.

Now drop it.

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 9:14 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

>  I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment.
> What I've said about IBM is this.
> 1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like
> a baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
> 2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
> 3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable
> on the planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions.
> (all facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in
> April. Fact.5. The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon
> my knowledge of the law.
>
> On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan <
> mkkha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Gabe,
> With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business
> criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
> Regards
> MKK
>
>
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg 
> wrote:
>
> >I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a
> career based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold
> my shares because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in
> anyway. I was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the
> price where I sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have
> increased greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an
> experienced observer over decades.
> >
> >Bill, are you familiar withhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
> which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would
> have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously
> arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about.
> So if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
> >
> >Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly.
> First, you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the
> law. Third, you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal
> necessary because the case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether
> the appeal will be accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what
> appeal judges will decide.
> >
> >You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal
> matters because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were
> qualified to study to be a lawyer? Seriously?
> >
> >You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM
> worshiper. I don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your
> reflexive defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across
> as worship. Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your
> opinions less than credible.
> >
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


-- 
Jay Maynard

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Seymour J Metz]

Item 5 is an opinion, not a fact. Do you know what is in the sealed motions? Do 
you know what effect they will have on the final outcome? I expect the 
judgement to be overturned, but the Universe often blows away expectations, and 
there are a lot of jokers in this deck. Even were I privy to all of the data I 
wouldn't be willing to bet on the outcome.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment. What 
I've said about IBM is this.
1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like a 
baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable on the 
planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions. (all 
facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in April. Fact.5. 
The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my knowledge of the 
law.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan 
 wrote:

 Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1eYdTjmJHv89ViLHZLJjfadg4E-unGI2a7JhinaolNTp7KHuaep2IZC_gChShakUjMwGKmhgVnbhl-jOFakqpYYoWJV4oEWVttaFSkMeMkBGYVG6cuIGgxADjCFukXBhDJbRC3jVdsY4KOIiTsnb8-UT1iEYTcMdFimF7on0AIDdGYd9S45aL9emrzrNjkfRQ0jdgcxu5PyqU1VMdkzUqtI-X_hkhbUo-Cc35YEWyKT4GTDKgKw5da5z4ZszBdmikiyVaC3Jstn4iCd-oFCTL16feBUYa0hef7Jxh7bEc1O3_EfCnn4Pxa3zoPQDTICW15w6Bue8-79aoQsjSHSVU9pao6PVjNCNzfQinLKMRyAkvd94yELM7z_eoouzQNFJaVx6kzMVrM24g8rzd-svSIzyKtJBKs9cgd6Qf_LFiWjkALsviZedLGbBr0gFpPhmG/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Bill Johnson]

 LOL, and you people said I can't read. I actually said OPINION for 5.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 10:23:26 AM EDT, Seymour J Metz  
wrote:  
 
 Item 5 is an opinion, not a fact. Do you know what is in the sealed motions? 
Do you know what effect they will have on the final outcome? I expect the 
judgement to be overturned, but the Universe often blows away expectations, and 
there are a lot of jokers in this deck. Even were I privy to all of the data I 
wouldn't be willing to bet on the outcome.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment. What 
I've said about IBM is this.
1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like a 
baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable on the 
planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions. (all 
facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in April. Fact.5. 
The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my knowledge of the 
law.

    On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan 
 wrote:

 Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1eYdTjmJHv89ViLHZLJjfadg4E-unGI2a7JhinaolNTp7KHuaep2IZC_gChShakUjMwGKmhgVnbhl-jOFakqpYYoWJV4oEWVttaFSkMeMkBGYVG6cuIGgxADjCFukXBhDJbRC3jVdsY4KOIiTsnb8-UT1iEYTcMdFimF7on0AIDdGYd9S45aL9emrzrNjkfRQ0jdgcxu5PyqU1VMdkzUqtI-X_hkhbUo-Cc35YEWyKT4GTDKgKw5da5z4ZszBdmikiyVaC3Jstn4iCd-oFCTL16feBUYa0hef7Jxh7bEc1O3_EfCnn4Pxa3zoPQDTICW15w6Bue8-79aoQsjSHSVU9pao6PVjNCNzfQinLKMRyAkvd94yELM7z_eoouzQNFJaVx6kzMVrM24g8rzd-svSIzyKtJBKs9cgd6Qf_LFiWjkALsviZedLGbBr0gFpPhmG/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Seymour J Metz]

With freedom of speech guarantied in this country, he has every right to 
criticize what Bill chooses to worship, just as Bill has every right to 
disregard that criticism.  You, of course, have every right to criticize either 
or both of them, and they both have every right to ignore such criticism.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Mohammad Khan [mkkha...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 9:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1PoqZoK4HGb52rMKj8Fs-tKtjKSvJzYo1vmVvsUdV5rDNPTWqj_V-0BOVtZYj5YFPkPyLLklN54NDBh5rksmOpxzv6Zjo4002GHQXuJ4Or_xiwV71qgkQ8cPv5DuGT0bf015y_1XVKNYVhhtDGPD1xQYdtdC_jlKnN3zJP3Vnt5XHt6xn3XZkKRSKaN-KZxxK8QboVTfQFJqTYyUwbcCh21LWSkGZXZ1rgGC41KlR5liqqkvAyv5LjrrjDYZKabXnVlq0hhN6uxBr9TQmDOM8EiRtD4jf11A1_b_rQAEo2tRnJK4CGnVP6573MOLVQ-LgvKFp2Rm6Mjcf8TaAOQAYNU-nKMkZu6XoJYLwhtd7D6satrRWx36dIS8x7Gi7Kicw7p0XDxrr0JdCAH-OGm5uKljAZT4s0ZXIErzCk6ih82aO7PH2EejjreqxVhDLwdo8/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Bill Johnson]

 Are you the TRON guy? If so, everyone needs to google you.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 10:18:30 AM EDT, Jay Maynard 
 wrote:  
 
 You've made your position abundantly clear, Bill.

Now drop it.

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 9:14 AM Bill Johnson <
0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:

>  I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment.
> What I've said about IBM is this.
> 1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like
> a baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
> 2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
> 3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable
> on the planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions.
> (all facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in
> April. Fact.5. The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon
> my knowledge of the law.
>
>    On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan <
> mkkha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Gabe,
> With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business
> criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
> Regards
> MKK
>
>
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg 
> wrote:
>
> >I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a
> career based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold
> my shares because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in
> anyway. I was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the
> price where I sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have
> increased greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an
> experienced observer over decades.
> >
> >Bill, are you familiar withhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
> which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would
> have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously
> arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about.
> So if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
> >
> >Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly.
> First, you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the
> law. Third, you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal
> necessary because the case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether
> the appeal will be accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what
> appeal judges will decide.
> >
> >You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal
> matters because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were
> qualified to study to be a lawyer? Seriously?
> >
> >You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM
> worshiper. I don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your
> reflexive defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across
> as worship. Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your
> opinions less than credible.
> >
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>


-- 
Jay Maynard

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Seymour J Metz]

"Fact.5."

Some people can't remember what they wrote. Now, it may be that you garbled the 
punctuation, but that's a you issue, not a me issue.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 LOL, and you people said I can't read. I actually said OPINION for 5.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 10:23:26 AM EDT, Seymour J Metz  
wrote:

 Item 5 is an opinion, not a fact. Do you know what is in the sealed motions? 
Do you know what effect they will have on the final outcome? I expect the 
judgement to be overturned, but the Universe often blows away expectations, and 
there are a lot of jokers in this deck. Even were I privy to all of the data I 
wouldn't be willing to bet on the outcome.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment. What 
I've said about IBM is this.
1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like a 
baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable on the 
planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions. (all 
facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in April. Fact.5. 
The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my knowledge of the 
law.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan 
 wrote:

 Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1eYdTjmJHv89ViLHZLJjfadg4E-unGI2a7JhinaolNTp7KHuaep2IZC_gChShakUjMwGKmhgVnbhl-jOFakqpYYoWJV4oEWVttaFSkMeMkBGYVG6cuIGgxADjCFukXBhDJbRC3jVdsY4KOIiTsnb8-UT1iEYTcMdFimF7on0AIDdGYd9S45aL9emrzrNjkfRQ0jdgcxu5PyqU1VMdkzUqtI-X_hkhbUo-Cc35YEWyKT4GTDKgKw5da5z4ZszBdmikiyVaC3Jstn4iCd-oFCTL16feBUYa0hef7Jxh7bEc1O3_EfCnn4Pxa3zoPQDTICW15w6Bue8-79aoQsjSHSVU9pao6PVjNCNzfQinLKMRyAkvd94yELM7z_eoouzQNFJaVx6kzMVrM24g8rzd-svSIzyKtJBKs9cgd6Qf_LFiWjkALsviZedLGbBr0gFpPhmG/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IB

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Bill Johnson]

It’s the Yahoo free email system. Every fact/opinion was AFTER the statement 
regardless. 5. The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my 
knowledge of the law.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Monday, June 6, 2022, 10:30 AM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:

"Fact.5."

Some people can't remember what they wrote. Now, it may be that you garbled the 
punctuation, but that's a you issue, not a me issue.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 LOL, and you people said I can't read. I actually said OPINION for 5.

    On Monday, June 6, 2022, 10:23:26 AM EDT, Seymour J Metz  
wrote:

 Item 5 is an opinion, not a fact. Do you know what is in the sealed motions? 
Do you know what effect they will have on the final outcome? I expect the 
judgement to be overturned, but the Universe often blows away expectations, and 
there are a lot of jokers in this deck. Even were I privy to all of the data I 
wouldn't be willing to bet on the outcome.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment. What 
I've said about IBM is this.
1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like a 
baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable on the 
planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions. (all 
facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in April. Fact.5. 
The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my knowledge of the 
law.

    On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan 
 wrote:

 Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1eYdTjmJHv89ViLHZLJjfadg4E-unGI2a7JhinaolNTp7KHuaep2IZC_gChShakUjMwGKmhgVnbhl-jOFakqpYYoWJV4oEWVttaFSkMeMkBGYVG6cuIGgxADjCFukXBhDJbRC3jVdsY4KOIiTsnb8-UT1iEYTcMdFimF7on0AIDdGYd9S45aL9emrzrNjkfRQ0jdgcxu5PyqU1VMdkzUqtI-X_hkhbUo-Cc35YEWyKT4GTDKgKw5da5z4ZszBdmikiyVaC3Jstn4iCd-oFCTL16feBUYa0hef7Jxh7bEc1O3_EfCnn4Pxa3zoPQDTICW15w6Bue8-79aoQsjSHSVU9pao6PVjNCNzfQinLKMRyAkvd94yELM7z_eoouzQNFJaVx6kzMVrM24g8rzd-svSIzyKtJBKs9cgd6Qf_LFiWjkALsviZedLGbBr0gFpPhmG/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Phil Smith III]

Outlook's junk filtering has "block sender", but I just did some
experimenting with list postings (another list) and it didn't block Senders,
just From.

 

Microsoft has a history of not understanding the Sender/Reply-To/From
hierarchy.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Logstream Sizing

[Steve Beaver]

I figured out how to compute the number of cylinders:

 

STG_SIZE(119880)

LS_SIZE(119880)

 

This works out to be 666 cylinders with a CISIZE of 24576

 

Why IBM would / could not publish this MINOR equation is a mystery to me 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Logstream Sizing

[rpinion865]

That's why you get paid the big bucks for being a z/OS system programmer.  
Unless zOSMF incorporates this calculation, and anyone without prior z/OS 
system programming experience can do it :)




Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
--- Original Message ---
On Monday, June 6th, 2022 at 10:51 AM, Steve Beaver  
wrote:


> I figured out how to compute the number of cylinders:
>
>
>
> STG_SIZE(119880)
>
> LS_SIZE(119880)
>
>
>
> This works out to be 666 cylinders with a CISIZE of 24576
>
>
>
> Why IBM would / could not publish this MINOR equation is a mystery to me
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Dustin Hayes]

Vanguard Integrity Professionals - External - Public
For those interested, if you want to block a particular sender then look into 
[message headers] as a means to do this.  This enables you to get around the 
problems with message relays (IBM-L, RACF-L, etc).

When you look at the message headers you can get the user's real email address 
and configure your mail client to perform actions based on this.
Check google for more details, but in the shortest version your looking for the 
first (oldest) "Received" or "Received-SPF" component of the message header.  
This will include their actual email, ip address, etc.

Obviously there are many clients, I do this with both Thunderbird and Outlook 
successfully.

(And agree about Outlook's junk filtering)


External - Public
Classified by dustin.ha...@go2vanguard.com on 2022.06.06 08:01:59

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Phil Smith III
Sent: Monday, 2022 June-06 07:45
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Don't feed the trolls

WARNING: This email originated outside of Vanguard.

DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

Outlook's junk filtering has "block sender", but I just did some
experimenting with list postings (another list) and it didn't block Senders,
just From.



Microsoft has a history of not understanding the Sender/Reply-To/From
hierarchy.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Carmen Vitullo]

good to know, I have a gmail account using Thunderbird, but my best 
option so far was to sort in the 'correspondence' and delete all emails 
from one person, took some time but worth it and saved me some folder 
space :)


Carmen

On 6/6/2022 10:02 AM, Dustin Hayes wrote:

Vanguard Integrity Professionals - External - Public
For those interested, if you want to block a particular sender then look into 
[message headers] as a means to do this.  This enables you to get around the 
problems with message relays (IBM-L, RACF-L, etc).

When you look at the message headers you can get the user's real email address 
and configure your mail client to perform actions based on this.
Check google for more details, but in the shortest version your looking for the first (oldest) 
"Received" or "Received-SPF" component of the message header.  This will 
include their actual email, ip address, etc.

Obviously there are many clients, I do this with both Thunderbird and Outlook 
successfully.

(And agree about Outlook's junk filtering)


External - Public
Classified bydustin.ha...@go2vanguard.com  on 2022.06.06 08:01:59

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Phil Smith III
Sent: Monday, 2022 June-06 07:45
To:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Don't feed the trolls

WARNING: This email originated outside of Vanguard.

DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

Outlook's junk filtering has "block sender", but I just did some
experimenting with list postings (another list) and it didn't block Senders,
just From.



Microsoft has a history of not understanding the Sender/Reply-To/From
hierarchy.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
/I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to 
succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand 
with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, 
and part with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Quarterly RSU

[Donald Blake]

Is it still true that IBM does more extensive testing for quarterly RSUs
than on the other monthly RSUs? It's been suggested to me that this may no
longer be the case. But wisdom used to be to perform maintenance on the
quarterly's.

My understanding was (may be dated) that IBM performed more stringent
testing with zOS, CICS, DB2 and other components at the quarterly RSU level
that wasn't done on the other monthly RSUs.

-- 
Donald H. Blake
Phone (518) 768-7067
Ecclesiastes 12:1


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Tony Perri, Santa Rosa Software]

This has been an entertaining read. My 2 cents' worth is that it could be 
factual that you said you stated your opinion. And, factually, you did state 
your opinion. 
Hopefully not to offend and respectfully,  

Tony Perri, CEO/Co-founder
Santa Rosa Software, LLC
https://santarosasoftware.com 
tony.pe...@santarosasoftware.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Bill Johnson
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:25 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 LOL, and you people said I can't read. I actually said OPINION for 5.

On Monday, June 6, 2022, 10:23:26 AM EDT, Seymour J Metz  
wrote:  
 
 Item 5 is an opinion, not a fact. Do you know what is in the sealed motions? 
Do you know what effect they will have on the final outcome? I expect the 
judgement to be overturned, but the Universe often blows away expectations, and 
there are a lot of jokers in this deck. Even were I privy to all of the data I 
wouldn't be willing to bet on the outcome.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Bill Johnson [0047540adefe-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:13 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

 I don't worship anyone or anything. It sets you up for disappointment. What 
I've said about IBM is this.
1. They've survived 111 years in a industry that spits out companies like a 
baseball player chewing tobacco. Fact.
2. They lead the world in patents. Almost every year. Fact.
3.  Their major platform still is the most secure, fastest, and reliable on the 
planet and they process the vast majority of important transactions. (all 
facts)4. Their lawsuit against GlobalFoundries was reinstated in April. Fact.5. 
The lawsuit with BMC will be overturned. Opinion based upon my knowledge of the 
law.

    On Monday, June 6, 2022, 09:53:37 AM EDT, Mohammad Khan 
 wrote:

 Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1eYdTjmJHv89ViLHZLJjfadg4E-unGI2a7JhinaolNTp7KHuaep2IZC_gChShakUjMwGKmhgVnbhl-jOFakqpYYoWJV4oEWVttaFSkMeMkBGYVG6cuIGgxADjCFukXBhDJbRC3jVdsY4KOIiTsnb8-UT1iEYTcMdFimF7on0AIDdGYd9S45aL9emrzrNjkfRQ0jdgcxu5PyqU1VMdkzUqtI-X_hkhbUo-Cc35YEWyKT4GTDKgKw5da5z4ZszBdmikiyVaC3Jstn4iCd-oFCTL16feBUYa0hef7Jxh7bEc1O3_EfCnn4Pxa3zoPQDTICW15w6Bue8-79aoQsjSHSVU9pao6PVjNCNzfQinLKMRyAkvd94yELM7z_eoouzQNFJaVx6kzMVrM24g8rzd-svSIzyKtJBKs9cgd6Qf_LFiWjkALsviZedLGbBr0gFpPhmG/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

---

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Tony Perri, Santa Rosa Software]

Freedom of speech is not guaranteed in the US. There are many things you cannot 
say freely, such as "fire" in a crowded theater causing mass panic, when in 
fact, there was no fire. 

Best regards, 

Tony Perri, CEO/Co-founder
Santa Rosa Software, LLC
https://santarosasoftware.com 
tony.pe...@santarosasoftware.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 10:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

With freedom of speech guarantied in this country, he has every right to 
criticize what Bill chooses to worship, just as Bill has every right to 
disregard that criticism.  You, of course, have every right to criticize either 
or both of them, and they both have every right to ignore such criticism.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Mohammad Khan [mkkha...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 9:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

Gabe,
With freedom of religion guaranteed in this country, you have no business 
criticizing what or who Bill chooses to worship.
Regards
MKK


On Sat, 4 Jun 2022 16:29:48 -0400, Gabe Goldberg  wrote:

>I don't have a dog in this ridiculous fight -- though I've also lived a career 
>based on IBM mainframes, including working for IBM. I long ago sold my shares 
>because the company was sadly heading downhill. But I'll chime in anyway. I 
>was apparently correct because IBM shares are now at about the price where I 
>sold, while other tech companies and the broader markets have increased 
>greatly. I'm no more an IBM hater than zMan, just also an experienced observer 
>over decades.
>
>Bill, are you familiar 
>withhttps://secure-web.cisco.com/1PoqZoK4HGb52rMKj8Fs-tKtjKSvJzYo1vmVvsUdV5rDNPTWqj_V-0BOVtZYj5YFPkPyLLklN54NDBh5rksmOpxzv6Zjo4002GHQXuJ4Or_xiwV71qgkQ8cPv5DuGT0bf015y_1XVKNYVhhtDGPD1xQYdtdC_jlKnN3zJP3Vnt5XHt6xn3XZkKRSKaN-KZxxK8QboVTfQFJqTYyUwbcCh21LWSkGZXZ1rgGC41KlR5liqqkvAyv5LjrrjDYZKabXnVlq0hhN6uxBr9TQmDOM8EiRtD4jf11A1_b_rQAEo2tRnJK4CGnVP6573MOLVQ-LgvKFp2Rm6Mjcf8TaAOQAYNU-nKMkZu6XoJYLwhtd7D6satrRWx36dIS8x7Gi7Kicw7p0XDxrr0JdCAH-OGm5uKljAZT4s0ZXIErzCk6ih82aO7PH2EejjreqxVhDLwdo8/https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FStreisand_effect
>  which you've greatly demonstrated? I doubt that everyone on the list would 
>have clicked the link zMan supplied but I'm sure that after your tediously 
>arguing with the article, everyone has clicked just to see what it's about. So 
>if it's misinformation, you've greatly increased its distribution.
>
>Asserting infallibility in predicting outcome of litigation is silly. First, 
>you don't have all the facts. Second, you're not qualified on the law. Third, 
>you don't know what arguments will be made on the appeal necessary because the 
>case has been decided. Fourth, you don't know whether the appeal will be 
>accepted. Fifth, if it's accepted, you don't know what appeal judges will 
>decide.
>
>You emphasize your qualifications to pontificate on esoteric legal matters 
>because 30 years ago you were a cop and back then you were qualified to study 
>to be a lawyer? Seriously?
>
>You accuse others of being IBM haters, while you're quite the IBM worshiper. I 
>don't see questioning or criticizing IBM as "hating", but your reflexive 
>defense of IBM on matters small and large really does come across as worship. 
>Ceaselessly arguing that IBM can do no wrong makes your opinions less than 
>credible.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Charles Mills]

And Freedom of Speech applies to "Congress" (and by extension the States).
It does not apply to a private venue such as this one. This list could make
a rule "no criticism of IBM" or "no criticism of BMC" without violating the
Constitution.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Tony Perri, Santa Rosa Software
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 8:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

Freedom of speech is not guaranteed in the US. There are many things you
cannot say freely, such as "fire" in a crowded theater causing mass panic,
when in fact, there was no fire. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Quarterly RSU

[Patrick Loftus]

Still the case as far as I'm aware.
Check out 
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/ibm-zos-consolidated-service-test-our-mission

Regards
Patrick

-- Original Message --

From "Donald Blake" 

To IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date 06/06/2022 16:56:37
Subject Quarterly RSU


Is it still true that IBM does more extensive testing for quarterly RSUs
than on the other monthly RSUs? It's been suggested to me that this may no
longer be the case. But wisdom used to be to perform maintenance on the
quarterly's.

My understanding was (may be dated) that IBM performed more stringent
testing with zOS, CICS, DB2 and other components at the quarterly RSU level
that wasn't done on the other monthly RSUs.

-- Donald H. Blake
Phone (518) 768-7067
Ecclesiastes 12:1


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Ed Jaffe]

On 6/6/2022 7:44 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:

Outlook's junk filtering has "block sender", but I just did some
experimenting with list postings (another list) and it didn't block Senders,
just From.


From: should be what you want. When I look at the mail headers from your 
post to which I am responding, I see:


Sender:   IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
From: Phil Smith III 
Subject: Re: Don't feed the trolls
To:   IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

If I wanted to block you (redirect mail from you to my "Trash" folder) I 
would filter on the "From:" field, not on "Sender:".



--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Quarterly RSU

[Carmen Vitullo]

Excellent link, thanks for sharing

Carmen

On 6/6/2022 11:19 AM, Patrick Loftus wrote:

Still the case as far as I'm aware.
Check out 
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/ibm-zos-consolidated-service-test-our-mission

Regards
Patrick

-- Original Message --
From "Donald Blake" 
To IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date 06/06/2022 16:56:37
Subject Quarterly RSU


Is it still true that IBM does more extensive testing for quarterly RSUs
than on the other monthly RSUs? It's been suggested to me that this 
may no

longer be the case. But wisdom used to be to perform maintenance on the
quarterly's.

My understanding was (may be dated) that IBM performed more stringent
testing with zOS, CICS, DB2 and other components at the quarterly RSU 
level

that wasn't done on the other monthly RSUs.

-- Donald H. Blake
Phone (518) 768-7067
Ecclesiastes 12:1
 



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
/I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to 
succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand 
with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, 
and part with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Thunderbird?

[Bob Bridges]

I've heard good things about Thunderbird before, but never looked into it
seriously.  Are there features in it for true programming (as Outlook has
using VBA)?  Where would you recommend I search for more detailed
information?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* I suppose there are SOME advantages to having another driver's license in
the family.  For example, my daughter is always available to pick up a video
at the movie rental place -- just not to return it.  ("Well there's always a
late fee," she explained when I asked her about this.)  -W Bruce Cameron */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Dustin Hayes
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 11:02

When you look at the message headers you can get the user's real email
address and configure your mail client to perform actions based on this.
Check google for more details, but in the shortest version your looking for
the first (oldest) "Received" or "Received-SPF" component of the message
header.  This will include their actual email, ip address, etc.

Obviously there are many clients, I do this with both Thunderbird and
Outlook successfully.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 09:10:34 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>... This list could make
>a rule "no criticism of IBM" or "no criticism of BMC" without violating the
>Constitution.
>
I hope the list makes no such rule.  It might unduly constrain writers
untrained in journalistic who might carelessly cross the line between
ad rem criticism of a product to ad hominem criticism of its supplier.

And Prior Restraint can be offensive.

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Thunderbird?

[Carmen Vitullo]

I'm using Thunderbird + FireFox now after tons of issues with my ISP's 
email service using outlook, outlook express, I have my ISP email 
account and my gmail account setup using Thunderbird, for me, much 
easier and offers some basic encryption, open pgp IIRC.


Carmen

On 6/6/2022 2:00 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

I've heard good things about Thunderbird before, but never looked into it
seriously.  Are there features in it for true programming (as Outlook has
using VBA)?  Where would you recommend I search for more detailed
information?

---
Bob Bridges,robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* I suppose there are SOME advantages to having another driver's license in
the family.  For example, my daughter is always available to pick up a video
at the movie rental place -- just not to return it.  ("Well there's always a
late fee," she explained when I asked her about this.)  -W Bruce Cameron */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Dustin Hayes
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 11:02

When you look at the message headers you can get the user's real email
address and configure your mail client to perform actions based on this.
Check google for more details, but in the shortest version your looking for
the first (oldest) "Received" or "Received-SPF" component of the message
header.  This will include their actual email, ip address, etc.

Obviously there are many clients, I do this with both Thunderbird and
Outlook successfully.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



--
/I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to 
succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand 
with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, 
and part with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

USS ps command

[Kenneth J. Kripke]

Is there a way to list the PID, PPID, UID, and, ASID associated with a USS
job or task running on z/OS?  

Of primary interest is to obtain the ASID of the Job or STC.  Currently, I
am using BPXUNIX and issuing the call to gather the information on all USS
processes using  

'ps -ef' which does list the PID, PPID, and UID but does not list an
associated ASID.  Is this possible using the ps command? 

 

 

Sincerely; 

 

Kenneth J. Kripke

k.kri...@comcast.net    

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS ps command

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 16:16:24 -0400, Kenneth J. Kripke wrote:

>Is there a way to list the PID, PPID, UID, and, ASID associated with a USS
>job or task running on z/OS?
>
>Of primary interest is to obtain the ASID of the Job or STC.  Currently, I
>am using BPXUNIX and issuing the call to gather the information on all USS
>processes using
>
(ITYM BPXWUNIX)

>'ps -ef' which does list the PID, PPID, and UID but does not list an
>associated ASID.  Is this possible using the ps command?
> 
What is your input?  A specific job ID?  In what format?  From what source?
Might the SDSF API be useful?

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS ps command

[Steve Smith]

For the first question, SDSF has a PS command that shows all that.

For the USS ps command, there is 'man' and a manual that you can refer to;
both guaranteed to be more accurate than whatever someone posts here.

sas

On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 4:17 PM Kenneth J. Kripke 
wrote:

> Is there a way to list the PID, PPID, UID, and, ASID associated with a USS
> job or task running on z/OS?
>
> Of primary interest is to obtain the ASID of the Job or STC.  Currently, I
> am using BPXUNIX and issuing the call to gather the information on all USS
> processes using
>
> 'ps -ef' which does list the PID, PPID, and UID but does not list an
> associated ASID.  Is this possible using the ps command?
>
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM ordered to pay $1.6b to BMC

[Retired Mainframer]

There are numerous examples in the history of this group where members have 
pilloried articles (and authors) that demonstrate a significant lack of 
understanding about the mainframe.

It was initially amusing (now it's just boring) that some members don't seem 
inclined to apply the same critical restraint to themselves.

How did we survive before kill files?

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Phil Smith III]

Ed Jaffe wrote:

>From: should be what you want. When I look at the mail headers from your
>post to which I am responding, I see:

 

Ah. This list I get digested; the one I was tinkering with uses Sender and 
From, where From is the list address. Lots of ways to
skin this cat.

 

My only problem with filters/rules is that I'm pushing the 32K (or is it 64K?) 
limit already.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Thunderbird?

[Michael Oujesky]

Might want to also have a look at Pandora

Michael

At 03:04 PM 6/6/2022, Carmen Vitullo wrote:

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm using Thunderbird + FireFox now after tons of issues with my 
ISP's email service using outlook, outlook express, I have my ISP 
email account and my gmail account setup using Thunderbird, for me, 
much easier and offers some basic encryption, open pgp IIRC.


Carmen

On 6/6/2022 2:00 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

I've heard good things about Thunderbird before, but never looked into it
seriously.  Are there features in it for true programming (as Outlook has
using VBA)?  Where would you recommend I search for more detailed
information?

---
Bob Bridges,robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* I suppose there are SOME advantages to having another driver's license in
the family.  For example, my daughter is always available to pick up a video
at the movie rental place -- just not to return it.  ("Well there's always a
late fee," she explained when I asked her about this.)  -W Bruce Cameron */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Dustin Hayes
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2022 11:02

When you look at the message headers you can get the user's real email
address and configure your mail client to perform actions based on this.
Check google for more details, but in the shortest version your looking for
the first (oldest) "Received" or "Received-SPF" component of the message
header.  This will include their actual email, ip address, etc.

Obviously there are many clients, I do this with both Thunderbird and
Outlook successfully.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email tolists...@listserv.ua.edu  with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
/I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to 
succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must 
stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is 
right, and part with him when he goes wrong. *Abraham Lincoln*/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 19:53:33 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:
>...
>Ah. This list I get digested; the one I was tinkering with uses Sender and 
>From, where From is the list address. Lots of ways to
>skin this cat.
>
That feels wrong: :
   The originator fields indicate the mailbox(es) of the source of the
   message.  The "From:" field specifies the author(s) of the message,
   that is, the mailbox(es) of the person(s) or system(s) responsible
   for the writing of the message.  The "Sender:" field specifies the
   mailbox of the agent responsible for the actual transmission of the
   message.  ...

>My only problem with filters/rules is that I'm pushing the 32K (or is it 64K?) 
>limit already.
>
???  How quaint!

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

SYNCSORT question: How to treat variable length KSDS as variable length input to SORT JOINKEYS

[Farley, Peter x23353]

I have two files, one a flat file with RECFM=VB,LRECL=8004, one a VSAM KSDS 
with RECORDSIZE(3000 26000) denoting variable length records for that KSDS.

However, when using that VSAM file as one side of a JOINKEYS operation, 
SYNCSORT claims the KSDS is RECFM=F:

WER482I  JNF2 STATISTICS
WER483B  32,780K BYTES OF VIRTUAL STORAGE AVAILABLE, MAX REQUESTED,
WER483B 0 BYTES RESERVE REQUESTED, 996K BYTES USED
WER108I  IN2  : RECFM=F; LRECL= 26000; CISIZE = 28672

Listcat of the VSAM file shows it is, in fact, defined as variable:

  ATTRIBUTES
KEYLEN15 AVGLRECL3000 
BUFSPACE---61440 CISIZE-28672
RKP1 MAXLRECL---26000 
EXCPEXIT--(NULL) CI/CA-26
STRIPE-COUNT---1

ACT-DIC-TOKENX'4009054005FE08FE0DFE0EFE0AFE'
SHROPTNS(2,3)  SPEED UNIQUE   NOERASE INDEXED   
NOWRITECHK UNORDERED  REUSE
NONSPANNEDCOMP-FORMT EXTENDEDEXT-ADDR

How do I get SYNCSORT to recognize and treat this variable-length KSDS as 
variable, just like the flat file which is my other JOINKEYS input?

Copying the VSAM to a flat RECFM=VB isn't a currently viable alternative due to 
large file size and limited "test" disk space.  Besides, I ought to be able to 
process a variable length file as a variable length file no matter what the 
actual file organization may be.

Peter

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Don't feed the trolls

[Phil Smith III]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>>Ah. This list I get digested; the one I was tinkering with uses Sender and 
>>From, 
>>where From is the list address. Lots of ways to skin this cat.

 

>That feels wrong: 
>:
>   The originator fields indicate the mailbox(es) of the source of the
>   message.  The "From:" field specifies the author(s) of the message,
>   that is, the mailbox(es) of the person(s) or system(s) responsible
>   for the writing of the message.  The "Sender:" field specifies the
>   mailbox of the agent responsible for the actual transmission of the
>   message.  ...

Yeah, you're right. It's been a while.

 

>>My only problem with filters/rules is that I'm pushing the 32K (or is it 
>>64K?) limit already.

 

>???  How quaint!

Outlook. Microsoft basically haven't touched the rules facility in 20 years. 
It's sad-Outlook's rules used to be pretty
cutting-edge, and now they're boring, buggy, and obsolete. That's another 
reason I don't want to tinker: they have a tendency to
stop working when you get near the limit. As in, certain rules don't fire when 
they should. And then if you run them manually, they
do, so it's not that they're defined wrong. Well-known problem.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: USS ps command

[Hank Oerlemans]

which is how I found ps -o xasid :-)

However 

https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=descriptions-ps-return-status-process

is much easier to read than a man page on OMVS.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: SYNCSORT question: How to treat variable length KSDS as variable length input to SORT JOINKEYS

[Alan Young]

Add a TYPE=V parameter to the JOINKEYS statement for the VSAM file. It might 
also need a RECFM=V on the SORTJNFx DD for the VSAM file.
 
Alan
 
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
Sent: Jun 6, 2022 6:07 PM
To: 
Subject: SYNCSORT question: How to treat variable length KSDS as variable 
length input to SORT JOINKEYS
 
I have two files, one a flat file with RECFM=VB,LRECL=8004, one a VSAM KSDS 
with RECORDSIZE(3000 26000) denoting variable length records for that KSDS.
 
However, when using that VSAM file as one side of a JOINKEYS operation, 
SYNCSORT claims the KSDS is RECFM=F:
 
WER482I JNF2 STATISTICS
WER483B 32,780K BYTES OF VIRTUAL STORAGE AVAILABLE, MAX REQUESTED,
WER483B 0 BYTES RESERVE REQUESTED, 996K BYTES USED
WER108I IN2 : RECFM=F ; LRECL= 26000; CISIZE = 28672
 
Listcat of the VSAM file shows it is, in fact, defined as variable:
 
ATTRIBUTES
KEYLEN15 AVGLRECL3000 BUFSPACE---61440 
CISIZE-28672
RKP1 MAXLRECL---26000 EXCPEXIT--(NULL) 
CI/CA-26
STRIPE-COUNT---1
ACT-DIC-TOKENX'4009054005FE08FE0DFE0EFE0AFE'
SHROPTNS(2,3) SPEED UNIQUE NOERASE INDEXED NOWRITECHK UNORDERED REUSE
NONSPANNED COMP-FORMT EXTENDED EXT-ADDR
 
How do I get SYNCSORT to recognize and treat this variable-length KSDS as 
variable, just like the flat file which is my other JOINKEYS input?
 
Copying the VSAM to a flat RECFM=VB isn't a currently viable alternative due to 
large file size and limited "test" disk space. Besides, I ought to be able to 
process a variable length file as a variable length file no matter what the 
actual file organization may be.
 
Peter
 
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee 
and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader 
of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments from your system.
 
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: IBM zSystems Webinars This Month (Asia-Pacific Friendly Times)

[Ravi Gaur]

Appreciate to provide and present the contents...look forward to it specially 
something hardly i see APAC Friendly now days..

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN