On Tue, 5 May 2009, Mark wrote:
Okay, enough with the righteous indignation already.
You know, if people put as much effort into my idea as they have into
'putting me in my place', there could be some really great discussions.
Sigh...
Only several posts ago you had never even heard of SMTP AUTH....
I mentioned it in my original post. But let's just ignore this small
factual error and continue....
... or how folks generally solve their roaming user problem by means of
having them connect to 'submission' port 587.
Granted. And upon being informed of this new development, I indicated my
approval of the idea, and that I would be implementing it. But it didn't
address the rest of the 'needs' I expressed....
So, perhaps peeps could have been nicer about your ignorance;
I don't care if people are 'nice'. I care that they actually say things
that END the ignorance. Saying "that is bad" or "that is good" gives
me NOTHING on which to make my *own* less-ignorant judgement in future.
The person who told me about 587 wasn't particularly nice. But he was VERY
informative. So I thank him for it. :)
but the ignorance itself was squarely yours. Live with it.
Well, if no one is going to bother to enlighten me, then yeah, I guess
we'll all have to live with it. But wouldn't it be simpler to say,
"The netload of DNS lookups for individual addresses would overtax the DNS
caching (or bandwidth)?" That's the answer I was really expecting. But
I am *ignorant* of those facts, and that's why I asked.
Way I see it, your idea was shot down....
No, my idea was DISMISSED. Small difference. An idea is 'shot down' when
someone presents rational arguments and reasons for WHY it is bad. Not
just *saying* it is 'bad'. Perhaps 'slapped down' would be the best phrase
for what has happened here.
... not because of any alleged arrogance on 'our' end, but simply
because folks like you are a dime a dozen, these days;
ROFL No arrogance there, oh no.....
Oh, and just to be clear, "arrogance" does NOT mean that you should not
feel or say that you know more than me. You do. At least in some areas. I
mean, that's why I asked questions of this group. No, "arrogance" is what
happens when those who know "more" feel that those like me who know "less"
are not *deserving* of an explanation. I mean, really, if my idea came up
before, then somewhere there is already a discussion on it, and it would
hardly take much effort to say, "RTFM - LINK". Oh, and it is also
"arrogant" to presume that someone hasn't done ANY reading on a subject.
Sure, I missed the 587 thing, but once I googled for it, I could see that
it is still relatively new, not even yet programmed as any standard into
MUA's, and so on. I'm not embarrased to have missed it. It wasn't a gross
error. Again, this is WHY I ask the questions on this group.
.... there's always the bloke-du-jour who comes up with a 'brilliant'
new, often elaborate, plan to do things differently. And usually, like
in your case, they haven't done their homework first.
More arrogance. I *did* do some homework. And even if I didn't know about
the port 587 thing, I did make it clear that I had an overall reason to
avoid the whole SMTP option, and I was looking for alternatives. Arrogance
is to presume that because you have decided on the 'best' way that I must
somehow be stupid or 'not do my homework' because I want a differen way.
.... Instead, thinking your idea was God's gift to earth ....
More irony. You throw accusations at me that better suit your pedantic
refusal to even *consider* or *discuss* a 'bad' idea. "God's gift to
Earth" is the person who believes his idea is so unquestionable that he
won't dicuss it, but just tell people that they are "ignorant" because
they don't accept *your* pronouncement.
decided to forego on finding out how people have been solving these
issues for the last ten years.
If the issues were "solved" then why do they still exist? Why isn't
everyone useing SPF and happy? It's not just ignorance and inertia. It's
situations like the one I described. A lazy choice is still a choice, and
if people are going to make them, then it stands to reason that we need to
find ways to work *with* the way people think/act rather than continue to
just arrogantly insist they do it 'our' way. Well, I mean, if they would
actually DO it, that would be so cool, but really, it hasn't happened
yet.
That arrogance was also yours. You just don't like being called on it.
Would it make you happy if I agreed? Sure. I'm arrogant. I have an ego.
Maybe you just don't have time to discuss my ideas. But I notice people
with these 'attitudes' always have time to tell me how arrogant I am. But
they never SHOW me. They never say, "your idea is stupid because". No,
they just say "our way is better", so by default my idea is "stupid"? LOL
Wouldn't know about 'terrible' or anything, but your idea simply fails a
variation of the Occam's razor test: it's unnecessarily complicated,
hard to implement, harder to maintain, and non-centralized, whereas much
simpler, more elegant, centralized solutions are at hand.
Two thoughts on that one:
Firstly, you keep *saying* it would be 'complicated' and 'hard to
implement', which I suppose is a little bit better than just saying 'bad',
but not much. You don't say HOW it would be so. It has the sound of
someone *assuming* that it would be so. I haven't bothered to contradict
this notion, but truthfully, I wouldn't advance the idea if I didn't have
a feeling that it *might* be easy to implement.
Secondly, and more importantly, Occam's razor is founded on the notion
of finding the simplest solution to a given problem. Don't multiply
entities unnecessarily. But the key word it 'necessary'. The solution must
indeed *solve* the problem. I am reminded of the Bloom County Cartoon
where Milo shows how he can solve all the world's energy needs with a
porcupine and two boxes of raisin bran, and the teacher says "porcupines
don't like raisin bran". No matter how 'good' your idea is, if some simple
business 'priority' (like keeping clients) interferes with its adoption,
then your solution is not *allowed* to work. Factor *that* in when
invoking Occam. I'm facing the same conundrum right here right now. My
idea *may* be good, but we'll never find out because this community is
busy stomping on it rather than discussing it. So according to Occam, my
idea is 'bad', not because it is unworkable, but because it is rejected.
Solutions you didn't even know about. That's where your quest should
have started, and where this thread ought to end.
Well, this thread is going to end anyway, because according to Occam's
logic, I can sure as asterisks tell that no one around here is really
going to give me a serious reply. Just more of this holier-than-thou
stuff. So with respect, I'm not reading any more. Not even sure why I'm
sending this, except, honestly, I have a bit of an ego. Someone posts
untruths about me, I feel compelled to correct them. Probably won't work.
But that's my shortcoming. (weak grin)
Anyways....
- C
