Completely agreed. Name-calling of any kind doesn't have a place here,
least of all something that so blatantly violates our Code of Ethics (
https://lopsa.org/CodeOfEthics).
--Matt
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Corey Quinn wrote:
> On May 21, 2014, at 7:27 PM, Michael Tiernan
> wrote:
>
On May 21, 2014, at 7:27 PM, Michael Tiernan wrote:
> I'd add "A balanced view of what the sales slut^H^H^H^Hdroid^H^H^H^H^H
> professional won't tell you." to what LOPSA /could/ do for me.
I don't expect to see this kind of terminology on LOPSA discuss. The cheap
laugh isn't worth alienating s
> On May 21, 2014, at 19:27, Michael Tiernan wrote:
>
> I'd add "A balanced view of what the sales slut^H^H^H^Hdroid^H^H^H^H^H
> professional won't tell you." to what LOPSA /could/ do for me.
Yes, this is along the lines of what I meant when I said I'd like to see LOPSA
serve as the anti-Gart
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 07:27:31PM -0400, Michael Tiernan wrote:
> I'd add "A balanced view of what the sales slut^H^H^H^Hdroid^H^H^H^H^H
> professional won't tell you." to what LOPSA /could/ do for me.
>
> Damn I've got to oil my censor mechanisim.
Allow me to recommend "salescritter". It's gend
On 5/19/14 3:20 PM, Stephan Fabel wrote:
> - how do I choose a technology "solution"?
> - when do I need a particular piece of technology?
> - what problem am I *really* trying to solve using this technology?
Excellent points. One thing I've already gotten from this group is a
better understanding
On Tue, 20 May 2014, N.J. Thomas wrote:
Now would be a good time to reflect on Fred Brooks' awesome essay "No
Silver Bullet". There is no one single technique that will make all your
problems go away -- BUT there are a number of things you can do to
mitigate against the re-imaging incident that
