I've been banned from UtterAccess

"Clif McIrvin" wrote in
:

Perhaps something as simple as saying "That advice is incorrect,
and mis-represents the facts; and this is why: ..... " instead of
"That advice is stupid, and this is why: ...." would directly
address the technical issues and be perfectly acceptable on UA's
moderated forum.

I disagree. I think it's important to convey the degree of
incorrectness by the choice of language.

I am strongly invested in what I do. That's why my posts are worded
strongly (when it's something I feel strongly about). Washing that
all away does not help the reader -- it only serves to obfuscate the
strength of any of my criticisms.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

wrote in

m:

If I had come across a pile of posts where other members, or
there questions/answers, were referred to as 'stupid', or by other
perjorative terms, I would never have joined,

The fact that you don't make a distinction between criticism of a
post and criticism of a person indicates to me that you are correct
that you need a sandbox that protects you from real life.

You belong at UA.

I clearly do not.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

wrote in

m:

I do hope that you will reconsider and resolve the issue with the
UA administrators.

Not possible. I disagree at a basic level with the philosophy behind
UA's moderating policy, which I consider to be damaging to good
discourse.

The answer to offensive speech is MORE SPEECH, not silencing those
who are impolite.

The answer to "your advice is stupid" is a post showing why the
advice is not stupid.

Seeking an apology for calling stupid advice stupid is damaging to
the quality of discussion, and that shows me that UA cannot be
considered a useful source of reliable information.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

"" Nobody else on UA has 12 years of regular experience with Jet
replication. Now, because of this over-sensitivity to strong
language, there is nobody left on UA who has extensive experience
with Jet replication to help those who need help.
--
David W. Fenton * * * * * * * * *http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com * *http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/""

Had you been afforded and acted upon an invite to the 2009 MVP summit,
you'd KNOW where replication is headed. Afronting someone's response
based on what you don't know is . . . now how did you put
that? . . . . oh, but that's the wrong word - "stupid" is different
from "ignorant".

Anyone with a penchant for research can discern ANY bit of information
regarding jet replication to suit their need. YOU are NOT the only jet/
rep master. I've worked with Access since it's beta release and one of
my first projects with Access was replicating databases around the
globe for an international manufacturer of micro-probes. Yeah, it was
rough and even Microsft did not have the answers in the early days.
For the entire first year of Access' release, they were unable to
answer half of of the questions I relayed. The same with replication
when it came out; it was a pioneering effort. So, you are not alone at
the top of that jet/rep heap. Some of us just to choose to be more
discreet. But when an ill-manner upstart starts raising a ruckus in a
non-professional manner, I feel the need to speak out and say so.

When you evacuate so close to the dinner table, it is clear you hold
no regard for civility. You seem to be able to make some incredible
"brownies", but when your secret ingredient is just a little bit of
dog poop, it's no wonder people want to avoid you. You may be good,
but it is obvious that you have let your skill get you where your
character cannot keep you.

When you escalate a thing, anticipate a response.

Moo

On Mar 21, 3:12*am, "David W. Fenton"
wrote:
wrote
m:

If I had come across a pile of posts where *other members, or
there questions/answers, were referred to as 'stupid', or by other
perjorative terms, I would never have joined,

The fact that you don't make a distinction between criticism of a
post and criticism of a person indicates to me that you are correct
that you need a sandbox that protects you from real life.

You belong at UA.

I clearly do not.

--
David W. Fenton * * * * * * * * *http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com * *http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

Hello David

You try to distinguish between criticising a post and criticising the
individual who posted it, however in criticing a post as *stupid* -
this is a pretty fine hair, nicely split. A technical argument is won
on the strength of the argument, not by the force of the invective
utilised. Use of perjoritive terms like *stupid* have no place in
these discussions and are totally unnecessary

Some of my posts at UA have been criticised - but the poster has
simply said e.g. 'I would do it this way', or 'this is a better way of
doing it' , and gone on to justify / explain his/her position, which I
have learnt from, and the OP gets a better, or a choice of, solutions.
The poster has never needed to say that my post was 'stupid' (even if
in some cases it was!) to get his / her message across, I can work out
for myself if a post was *stupid* - I don't need some pillock telling
me.

In an earlier post you say that you don't want to change your persona
dependent on the forum you are visiting, You are correct - you
shouldn't need to - you have no need to use blunt, confrontational
language to get your message across in any forum - it only weakens an
otherwise valid argument.

It is very sad that you have reacted the way you have, The UA rules
state very clearly
"Participants shall not post any material that (1) is likely to cause
offence ..."

Many people join UA, as opposed to other groups, for this very reason,
- not because thay want to be protected from the real world but
because they want to have an intelligent, courteous discourse on a
subject without being subjected to unnecessary and destructive
criticism.

As someone with obvious ability and some talent, I am surprised that
you are unable to see this.

kind regards

Bernie (pere_de_chipstick)

"David W. Fenton" wrote

I just don't get this incredible sensitivity that I see
among many participants in online forums.

Apparently "warm fuzzies" are as important to some as real information.

These people wouldn't have lasted 1 second back
in the old days of Usenet, and I think that was
actually a good thing.

Seems like a good spot for me to put in a plug for comp.databases.ms-access,
which is USENET, still around (as you, of course, know -- as you are a
regular there), and still useful. If a user doesn't employ newsreader
software, it can be accessed via http://groups.google.com (though I don't
recommend that for general use, but do recommend it for searching the
archives).

Larry

Sorry, I didn't see your post at Utter Access before they removed it.
Knowing you, I figured you said it was bloody stupid, Roger blew a gasket,
and the firing squad loaded their guns.

David, I know you make a distinction between the person and the advice the
person gave. But when you call somebody's advice stupid, many will take it
personally, especially the ones who consider themselves experts. If it were
me and I got mad enough to call somebody's idea or advice stupid, after I
calmed down, I would've apologized. It's the right thing to do, because
calling it stupid is disrespectful and unprofessional. I don't want to be
seen as either one.

I know you disagree with me about apologizing, but we'll just have to agree
to disagree and leave it alone. No sense in pouring lemon juice on a paper
cut.

The next part of my message isn't for David, but for others reading this
message. (Yes, the two of you who haven't plonked me yet.)

That said, if David Fenton tells me my idea or advice is stupid, I know -
with certainty - it *is* stupid, and I should listen to what he has to say if
I want to prevent the project based on my bad idea from going south. David
isn't telling me it's stupid because he wants to poke me in the eye with it,
it's because he wants to genuinely help me understand and prevent me from
making big mistakes. I'm not so lacking in self confidence or thinking I'm
such a genius that his telling me how wrong I am hurts me or my reputation.

I've gotten a few emails on David's banning. Seems lots of Utter Access VIPs
are upset and plonking David Fenton in these groups because of the episode at
Utter Access. That doesn't hurt David in the slightest. The people missing
out in the aftermath are Utter Access and the ones who consider themselves
"already" Access experts and think they can afford to plonk David Fenton.
They're the ones who'll miss out on his ideas and advice.

This situation's just like the situation years ago where people plonked
Michael Kaplan because of his sharp tongue. Michael knows *way* more about
Access than they did, and they missed out on learning from him because they
didn't like the way he said it. Well I learned, but I know I still have
plenty more to learn. I'm not plonking Access experts. Those who do plonk
won't be learning more about advanced Access topics nearly as fast as I am,
will they?

Chris


David W. Fenton wrote:
Once again, David Fenton *knows* what he's talking about. He just
doesn't say it with a spoonful of honey to make it go down easier.

You are so very kind, and I'm glad to find out that other people
reading the thread understood my point. I don't know if you saw my
original response, the one that prompted the request that I
apologize, but I called the advice given "stupid." I didn't call the
person who made it stupid -- had I done so, I should have
apologized.

Your post delineates exactly why the advice was stupid (I was much
less verbose in dismissing SharePoint), and makes me feel
substantially less regretful about refusing to apologize.

--
Message posted via AccessMonster.com
http://www.accessmonster.com/Uwe/For...ccess/200903/1

Well, I'd planned on staying out of this, but you dragged my name into it,
something even Mr. Fenton had the courtesy to refrain from.

Sorry, I didn't see your post at Utter Access before they removed it.
Knowing you, I figured you said it was bloody stupid, Roger blew a gasket,
and the firing squad loaded their guns.

It's interesting how people have made assumptions and chosen up sides over
this without knowing the facts behind it. In that regard, it is unfortunate
that the posts were edited. Since they were, I won't comment on them.
However, the entire text of my original complaint to the UA moderators was:

"I don't mind being wrong, but I object to being called stupid." (and added
a link to the post.)

Not exactly a blown gasket.

Any deliberation was done privately, outside of my hearing. Yet, I think
their call was a good one. Not because I got some sort of "vindication"
from it. That notion is, well, silly. I don't know Mr. Fenton. This is the
first time our paths have crossed. I have no need to prove myself to him,
or him to me, for that matter.

No, I think it was a good decision because it is in keeping with the rules
they have established to promote the atmosphere of UA. It is their board
and they have every right to insist on any level of decorum they choose. It
would be manifestly unfair to expect politeness from everyone except those
who are deemed experts. Even the VIPs must adhere to the posting rules. To
me, that shows their integrity more than anything else.

I personally don't adhere to the notion that just because someone is an
expert, he or she has the right to be as discourteous as they please. When
someone's opinion is called stupid, it discourages them from continuing.
Some may give up completely. In my case, that won't happen, but it could
with others. Mr. Fenton seems to think that the Access community is better
off without those people, but I believe the community is only made poorer.
People need to know that they can make mistakes without being belittled. It
lets them take chances, and without taking chances, no one grows.

--
--Roger Carlson
MS Access MVP (2006 - 2009)
www.rogersaccesslibrary.com

Well said, Roger

The impact of the remark is nicely summed up in this statement made by
another MVP in reference to insulting advice vs a person, "I don't
believe there is such a vast difference. While that might be true to
some extent, if you refer to an idea as stupid, and it could be, it's
implied that said provider was at the very least being stupid for a
moment, and potentially longer than that."

And, 'Chris', you are right -- it was prefaced by that stronger word,
which made it even worse as many of us (especially women) know the
origin of that term. You made some worthy comments. Email me sometime ...

Bernie, Mark, Tony, and Cliff -- more good points ... brownies anyone?
smile

Glenn, I thought your post was great

rkc -- strong language but on target

RonW -- when you join UtterAccess, email me and I will give you some
tips I have written up on using UA

Larry, thanks for posting the link

~~~
I would also like to point out that many UA members, that now give great
advice, started out as beginners asking questions. As they learn and
over time, many of them answer more questions than they ask -- and often
times, those initial answers need to be corrected, but we do it with
kindness. One of the best ways to learn is by teaching. People get
hooked on UtterAccess because it is like a big family and we treat each
other with respect.

In this case, however, you are far from being a beginner, and simply
suggested that alternate approaches be explored (after giving a book
recommendation on replication). You and I both know, as Mark said,
where replication is headed. While Access 2007 can still work with
replication via code (not available on menus), that may not be the case
in future versions as Access may not continue to support older
databases. It makes sense to research the technologies that Microsoft
is building versus the ones they are getting rid of. It is a good idea
to see what else is available so that informed decisions can be made.

~~~

David, I took a look at your website -- wow! you are quite the
musician! As a song writer, composer, and piano player, I tried
composing with an application, but got frustrated when I tried to edit
.... one of these days, I would like spend more time to learn about
electronic composition. I have CakeWalk (which I did some reading in a
book about when our family took a vacation) and Finale NotePad (but that
is what I got frustrated with). Can you suggest any good forums or
websites? Or perhaps a better package that is not too overwhelming for
beginners but still has some power?


Warm Regards,
Crystal

http://www.YouTube.com/user/LearnAccessByCrystal

*
(: have an awesome day
*




Roger Carlson wrote:
Well, I'd planned on staying out of this, but you dragged my name into
it, something even Mr. Fenton had the courtesy to refrain from.

Sorry, I didn't see your post at Utter Access before they removed it.
Knowing you, I figured you said it was bloody stupid, Roger blew a
gasket,
and the firing squad loaded their guns.

It's interesting how people have made assumptions and chosen up sides
over this without knowing the facts behind it. In that regard, it is
unfortunate that the posts were edited. Since they were, I won't
comment on them. However, the entire text of my original complaint to
the UA moderators was:

"I don't mind being wrong, but I object to being called stupid." (and
added a link to the post.)

Not exactly a blown gasket.

Any deliberation was done privately, outside of my hearing. Yet, I
think their call was a good one. Not because I got some sort of
"vindication" from it. That notion is, well, silly. I don't know Mr.
Fenton. This is the first time our paths have crossed. I have no need
to prove myself to him, or him to me, for that matter.

No, I think it was a good decision because it is in keeping with the
rules they have established to promote the atmosphere of UA. It is
their board and they have every right to insist on any level of decorum
they choose. It would be manifestly unfair to expect politeness from
everyone except those who are deemed experts. Even the VIPs must adhere
to the posting rules. To me, that shows their integrity more than
anything else.

I personally don't adhere to the notion that just because someone is an
expert, he or she has the right to be as discourteous as they please.
When someone's opinion is called stupid, it discourages them from
continuing. Some may give up completely. In my case, that won't happen,
but it could with others. Mr. Fenton seems to think that the Access
community is better off without those people, but I believe the
community is only made poorer. People need to know that they can make
mistakes without being belittled. It lets them take chances, and
without taking chances, no one grows.

rkc wrote in

m:

PLONK

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/