IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate between those with the most conflicting opinions.
- Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a big "hit"!
We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
It would be great fun, and educational too.
I'm sure that I could arrange for the sponsor to buy Nuno, HJR and Foote a round-trip ticket to SF, and cover their hotel and meal expenses, so costs will not be an issue.
I'm sure that Ault and Niemiec will be on-board, so I await a response for Nuno, Howard and Richard. . .
Don Burleson wrote: > IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > big "hit"!
> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would > have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
Don, Minor nit, but, I believe the phrase is "no holds barred" - from wrestling in which NO method of holding the opponent would considered illegal.
>> IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical >> issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less >> than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons >> that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
>> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the >> Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate >> between those with the most conflicting opinions.
>> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto >> - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
>> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an >> independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can >> arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a >> big "hit"!
>> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar >> for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great >> Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
>> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor >> advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would >> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love >> conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry >> Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> Don, Minor nit, but, I believe the phrase is "no holds barred" - from > wrestling in which NO method of holding the opponent would considered > illegal.
> Michael Austin.
I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
But I think you should also fly Sybrand in to moderate it...
Don Burleson allegedly said,on my timestamp of 7/06/2004 11:29 PM:
> than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons
Disagree. People just love conflict, like you state below. :)
> that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
What could be wider than the Usenet?
> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto
didn't you read my reply about leaving me out of your little wars? I don't like being "bunched up" with Oakies. Like I said: those organisations are not my cuppa tea even if I qualified for them. And you are completely wrong in assuming Howard, myself and Richard have some sort of a "running agreement" on anything technical. That may well not be the case. Remember: it's ALWAYS open to challenge, no matter who claims it.
> for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
The only one here with aspirations to theatrical "Oracle Titan" may well be you... :)
> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
One of the reasons why I always refused to live in the USA (and there were plenty of offers) is the existence in that country of things like the Jerry Springer show.
> It would be great fun, and educational too.
Disagree. It would just be yet another loonie Jerry Springer show.
> I'm sure that Ault and Niemiec will be on-board, so I await a response > for Nuno, Howard and Richard. . .
Don, in case your "spies" have not told you (how could they: NO ONE has seen me talking in public in the last 10 years!), I have a family life which I cherish ABOVE all else and will NOT trade for ANYTHING. Public life like you propose is incompatible with that and I don't engage in it for the time being: this should now be bleeding OBVIOUS from my ABSENCE from ANY IOUG functions or meetings since about 1994.
Having said that: I'm quite open to any debate here where statements can be re-verified, x-checked and openly discussed and proved for as long as needed. Or any other on-line forum, in written format. However it will have to wait until I'm done with the current project, EOM July. I'm afraid that HAS priority over ANYTHING else and I'm quite busy until then.
One condition though: whatever the outcome if you ever come to Australia you are most welcome to front up for a drink and a chat. Like I said so many times, nothing personal. We have never even met.
> >> IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > >> issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > >> than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > >> that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
> >> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > >> Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > >> between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> >> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > >> - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> >> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > >> independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > >> arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > >> big "hit"!
> >> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > >> for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > >> Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
> >> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > >> advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would > >> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > >> conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > >> Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> > Don, Minor nit, but, I believe the phrase is "no holds barred" - from > > wrestling in which NO method of holding the opponent would considered > > illegal.
> > Michael Austin.
> I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
> But I think you should also fly Sybrand in to moderate it...
> cheers!
I'd like to nominate Pete Sharman (.au) and Carel Jan Engle (.nl) for referees. They both have large enough builds (and sharp enough wit) to keep it a clean match. If anyones gets out line line, Pete will "manage their ASS!".
> >> IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > >> issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > >> than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > >> that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
> >> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > >> Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > >> between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> >> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > >> - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> >> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > >> independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > >> arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > >> big "hit"!
> >> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > >> for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > >> Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
> >> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > >> advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would > >> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > >> conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > >> Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> Rather than tagging others, how about DB vs HJR only! that would be > educational and fun ;-)
Well, I think your post confirms that Don's pulled off a neat trick here.
It's not fun to have him contact your employer in a bid to silence you. It's not fun to have him make veiled threats about 'dropping by' with his 'friends' It's not fun to see a professional issue descend to the "people love conflict" level. It's not fun to see what should be a matter of dispassionate fact and technical accuracy become vaudeville.
But distracting people with "fun" is what Don hoped he would manage.
It saves him having to be technically accurate in his descriptions of how Oracle works. It saves him having a conscience about selling misleading and inaccurate information to unsuspecting Oracle newbies. It saves him having to behave in a professional manner. It saves him being subjected to the technical scrutiny he deserves, and can't stand.
> > >> IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > > >> issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > > >> than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > > >> that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
> > >> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > > >> Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > > >> between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> > >> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > > >> - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> > >> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > > >> independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > > >> arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > > >> big "hit"!
> > >> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > > >> for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > > >> Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
> > >> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > > >> advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would > > >> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > > >> conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > > >> Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
Yes, I'm getting lots of interest in a face-to-face debate.
However, I've been informed that there may be a problem that I did not consider, that these names don't correspond with "real" people.
It turns out that I cannot verify that Nuno Souto, Richard Foote or Howard J. Rogers actually exist. No resumes with verifiable details, no photographs of any of them.
It's so easy to create anonymous accounts that I guess you never really know who you are talking with. Heck, you don't even know for-sure who I am.
I just got an e-mail suggesting that Howard J. Rogers is really a 14 year-old girl, but I have no way to prove it, one way or the other. . . .
> >> IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > >> issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > >> than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > >> that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
> >> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > >> Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > >> between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> >> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > >> - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> >> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > >> independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > >> arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > >> big "hit"!
> >> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > >> for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > >> Oracle Debate – Clash of the Titans".
> >> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > >> advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would > >> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > >> conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > >> Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> > Don, Minor nit, but, I believe the phrase is "no holds barred" - from > > wrestling in which NO method of holding the opponent would considered > > illegal.
> > Michael Austin.
> I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
> But I think you should also fly Sybrand in to moderate it...
On 7 Jun 2004 12:59:18 -0700, d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote:
>However, I've been informed that there may be a problem that I did not >consider, that these names don't correspond with "real" people.
>It turns out that I cannot verify that Nuno Souto, Richard Foote or >Howard J. Rogers actually exist. No resumes with verifiable details, >no photographs of any of them.
Mr Burleson, It strikes me you are incapable to see that resorting to slander as the above ruins whatever credit you have build in the field. In fact whatever you have written, whether accurate or inaccurate, deserves to be thrashed, now you to need to proof or your inaccuracies by contributions to an international forum that should be subjected to legal scrutiny, as your contributions are slander. In short, Mr. Burleson, if you exist, you only deserve contempt and disgust.
> > I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
> Yes, I'm getting lots of interest in a face-to-face debate.
> However, I've been informed that there may be a problem that I did not > consider, that these names don't correspond with "real" people.
> It turns out that I cannot verify that Nuno Souto, Richard Foote or > Howard J. Rogers actually exist. No resumes with verifiable details, > no photographs of any of them.
On the other hand you did threaten the organisations 2 of them work for, and have a similar track record with others, with lawsuits. I'm not quite sure where threatening to sue people that you doubt exist comes on the scale of normal behaviour - but certainly i've never been tempted.
> It's so easy to create anonymous accounts that I guess you never > really know who you are talking with. Heck, you don't even know > for-sure who I am.
Well I'm certainly beginning to wonder. It occurs to me that people are assuming that you are the Don Burleson who is behind www.dba-oracle.com and therefore the full time professional who is a recognized expert in Oracle Architectures, Oracle Database Administration, Oracle Tuning, Oracle Data Warehouse services and Oracle Consulting services, on the other hand it would seem to me that professional is the last word that one would use of someone who trades threats and personal insults in public. playground bully seems rather more appropriate, though I believe other words might also have been used appropriately.
> I just got an e-mail suggesting that Howard J. Rogers is really a 14 > year-old girl, but I have no way to prove it, one way or the other. .
Well you did suggest that the insults were fun to read - but it would appear that you would be aged approximately 5 to appreciate this level of discourse. Although when words are said that shouldn't be as they have been here my 2 year old has a phrase for it "not nice, daddy". She is of course correct.
If you are the Don Burleson that I think you are then there is no need for a debate - after all you carried a link to my site back in April - that referred to a paper that has all we need. In it I suggest that where there is a common belief or popular assumption it is always wise to test the statement.
Now as it happens you got rather upset with Richard's paper that quoted you in a nice defensible manner. You said
"Note that Oracle indexes will spawn to a fourth level only in areas of the index where a massive insert has occurred, such that 99% of the index has three levels, but the index is reported as having four levels. " Don Burleson: comp.databases.oracle.server newsgroup post dated 31st January 2003
This is eminently testable. Rather unfortunately your posting has disappeared from Google, though obviously some online archives still have it and it appears in peoples responses to you, nevertheless as of 21:50GMT you still have the article in which you claim
"Index height The height of the index refers to the number of levels that are spawned by the index as a result in row inserts. When a large amount of rows are added to a table, Oracle may spawn additional levels of an index to accommodate the new rows. Hence, an Oracle index may have four levels, but only in those areas of the index tree where the massive inserts have occurred. Oracle indexes can support many millions of entries in three levels, and any Oracle index that has four or more levels would benefit from rebuilding. "
So a simple online discussion is possible, can you demonstrate an Oracle Index with different heights in different parts of the tree? I'll quite happily work on a demo that anyone can run that shows no difference in height with arbitrarily large inserts into a single part of the index tree.
didn't you read my reply about leaving me out of your little wars? I don't like being "bunched up" with Oakies. Like I said: those organisations are not my cuppa tea even if I qualified for them.
NL> I suspect that this marks the first time the word organisation has been used in respect of the OakTable Network. I personally hope its the last.
Remember: it's ALWAYS open to challenge, no matter who claims it.
NL> Of course an attitude like that is a prerequisite for Oak table membership :).
Having said that: I'm quite open to any debate here where statements can be re-verified, x-checked and openly discussed and proved for as long as needed. Or any other on-line forum, in written format. However it will have to wait until I'm done with the current project, EOM July. I'm afraid that HAS priority over ANYTHING else and I'm quite busy until then.
One condition though: whatever the outcome if you ever come to Australia you are most welcome to front up for a drink and a chat. Like I said so many times, nothing personal. We have never even met.
>>I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
> Yes, I'm getting lots of interest in a face-to-face debate.
> However, I've been informed that there may be a problem that I did not > consider, that these names don't correspond with "real" people.
> It turns out that I cannot verify that Nuno Souto, Richard Foote or > Howard J. Rogers actually exist. No resumes with verifiable details, > no photographs of any of them.
> It's so easy to create anonymous accounts that I guess you never > really know who you are talking with. Heck, you don't even know > for-sure who I am.
> I just got an e-mail suggesting that Howard J. Rogers is really a 14 > year-old girl, but I have no way to prove it, one way or the other. . > . .
snip
I have no doubt that Howard is a real person and who he says he is, I have exchanged e-mails with him regarding oracle/linux issues from time to time and I frequently tour his site.
When I first read the thread on a debate it sounded semi-serious, my suggesting SB as a moderator was purely tongue-in-cheek. Of course I had not read the preceding thread that I am assuming led up to this.
Good debates are great to watch and usually quite informative, but having read further on this topic I'm quite sure this one would be neither...
d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote in message <news:998d28f7.0406070529.2594aaf3@posting.google.com>... > IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
Has the percentage ever changed (I must say, over the last 15 years, most of my cow-orkers [sic] don't participate in many online fora about Oracle)? If it has, could the reason be the proliferation of alternate fora? Are there really that many long-winded threads? Does anyone have to read them if there are (I admit, it's like watching a slow-motion car crash)?
> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > big "hit"!
> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > Oracle Debate ? Clash of the Titans".
How about The Three Stooges v. Mothra, Godzilla and Reptilicus?
> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would
Man, Freud would have a banana-day with that one.
> have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> It would be great fun, and educational too.
Great fun, maybe, but I have trouble seeing much actual information coming out of an hour of this.
> I'm sure that I could arrange for the sponsor to buy Nuno, HJR and > Foote a round-trip ticket to SF, and cover their hotel and meal > expenses, so costs will not be an issue.
The sponsor is ...? And what do they get out of it?
> I'm sure that Ault and Niemiec will be on-board, so I await a response > for Nuno, Howard and Richard. . .
Howard a 14 year old gurl ..man thats cool and he claimed that he worked for oracle..cool..does oracle employ child labour or what hahaa..comown don we all know howard he has done a great work here..
It is, isn't it? :) I'm beginning to think it is not Don in those messages. Haven't run a trace yet, but will do soon. He can't be that crazy to suggest we do not exist, after publicly acknowledging our existence. Then again, he may be in trouble to establish exactly who to "call through the backdoor" and this could be a bit of social engineering in action. Well, if he can't find me on the Net then he doesn't deserve a reply.
> NL> I suspect that this marks the first time the word organisation has been > used in respect of the OakTable Network. I personally hope its the last.
HmmmIdunno, actually reading the foreword to Connor's book: "...Oaktable network is an informal organization..."...
But what loses it for me is this: "...people have been admitted..." I strongly dislike the suggestion of "admission panels" in anything to do with professional associations. Too close to elite, something I refuse to be involved or associated with. And God only knows how many of those in the past have been responsible for the current state of Oracle myths. Last thing anyone needs is another one. But anyways it's just my opinion and everyone is of course welcome to differ or ignore it. Fine with me.
BTW the book is awesome so far, this just won me (if I may just reproduce one sentence with apologies to the publisher):
<We have deliberately avoided the term "performance" because efficiency is more than just performance.>
If that is not worth a shot of the best scotch to be found, I don't know what is! :)
> NL> Of course an attitude like that is a prerequisite for Oak table > membership :).
I got it from an Oakie who was kind enough to write it down in his book when asked to sign it. See, it works! ;)
> NL> Nicely said.
Yeah but I regret to say, unfortunately wasted... It appears to be degenerating into another "mine is bigger than yours" contest. Ah well, stuff it.
Very well said Noon ..i must agree with you wholly..who cares who wins the intellectual debate .everybody has a personal life to cater too .
lets assume Howard loses maybe becoz of rich superior presentation skills does that make a difference to me perhpahs not i would still read what howard writes because of gift for writing in PLAIN english
what if richard foote (richard no offence meant) says dont rebuild indexes who cares man..if the IT manager is hell bent on me rebuilding indexes i dont mind being paid for the extra time i am junior guy and have a family to feed too..
if tomorrow Howard Decides to right about DB2 admin just becoz he got sick of oracle i would read about Db2 too coz it gives me chance to enhance my knoweledge..
bottomline debate doesnt really matter ..Techno funks dont run business REAL MANAGERS do who are paid by the company ..
> > than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons
> Disagree. People just love conflict, like you state below. :)
> > that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
> What could be wider than the Usenet?
> > - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto
> didn't you read my reply about leaving me out of your little wars? > I don't like being "bunched up" with Oakies. Like I said: those > organisations are not my cuppa tea even if I qualified for them. > And you are completely wrong in assuming Howard, myself and > Richard have some sort of a "running agreement" on anything > technical. That may well not be the case. > Remember: it's ALWAYS open to challenge, no matter who claims it.
> > for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > > Oracle Debate Clash of the Titans".
> The only one here with aspirations to theatrical "Oracle Titan" may > well be you... :)
> > have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > > conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > > Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
> One of the reasons why I always refused to live in the USA > (and there were plenty of offers) is the existence in that country > of things like the Jerry Springer show.
> > It would be great fun, and educational too.
> Disagree. It would just be yet another loonie Jerry Springer show.
> > I'm sure that Ault and Niemiec will be on-board, so I await a response > > for Nuno, Howard and Richard. . .
> Don, in case your "spies" have not told you (how could they: NO ONE has > seen me talking in public in the last 10 years!), I have a family life wh > ich > I cherish ABOVE all else and will NOT trade for ANYTHING. Public life > like you propose is incompatible with that and I don't engage in it for t > he > time being: this should now be bleeding OBVIOUS from my ABSENCE from ANY
> IOUG functions or meetings since about 1994.
> Having said that: I'm quite open to any debate here where statements can > be > re-verified, x-checked and openly discussed and proved for as long as > needed. Or any other on-line forum, in written format. However it > will have to wait until I'm done with the current project, EOM July. > I'm afraid that HAS priority over ANYTHING else and I'm quite busy > until then.
> One condition though: whatever the outcome if you ever come to Australia
> you are most welcome to front up for a drink and a chat. Like I said > so many times, nothing personal. We have never even met.
> > I've never been to OOW yet, but I'd go if this event was a "go"!
> Yes, I'm getting lots of interest in a face-to-face debate.
> However, I've been informed that there may be a problem that I did not > consider, that these names don't correspond with "real" people.
> It turns out that I cannot verify that Nuno Souto, Richard Foote or > Howard J. Rogers actually exist. No resumes with verifiable details, > no photographs of any of them.
> It's so easy to create anonymous accounts that I guess you never > really know who you are talking with. Heck, you don't even know > for-sure who I am.
> I just got an e-mail suggesting that Howard J. Rogers is really a 14 > year-old girl, but I have no way to prove it, one way or the other. . > . .
Don, that's a disgraceful comment. Just appalling.
You have really confirmed to me (and many others) a great deal about yourself in the last couple of days. I honestly feel sorry for you, I really do.
For the umpteenth time, please stop this nonsense and conduct yourself in a civil and professional manner.
> IMHO, these long-winded threads often cloud the real Oracle technical > issues. While the insults are fun to read, the reality is that less > than 1% of Oracle professionals read this forum anymore, for reasons > that are all-too evident. Let's get the message to a wider audience.
Don, the reason why the technical issues are clouded is because, despite repeated attempts, you refuse to engage in a technical debate. It's really that simple. Name one constructive, technically based comment you've made here in past few months. Just one.
And you what this type of crap to go out to a wider audience. Good grief !!
> Since many people in this forum have very strong opinions about the > Oracle technology perspectives, I would like to propose a debate > between those with the most conflicting opinions.
> - Team one: Richard Foote, Howard J. Rogers and Nuno Souto > - Team two: Mike Ault, Rich Niemiec and Don Burleson
> This would be a live one-hour public debate, moderated by an > independent sponsor such as SearchOracle, IOUG or DBAZine. I can > arrange a room at Oracle Openworld in San Francisco, and it could be a > big "hit"!
> We would film it, and the sponsor will then create a one-hour Webinar > for distribution worldwide. I'm thinking of a title like "The Great > Oracle Debate - Clash of the Titans".
Don, so you now also consider yourself a "Titan" do you ? Only you Don would have such a high opinion of yourself, only you ...
> We could discuss Index Internals, why Burleson & Niemiec give poor > advice, or any other topics you like. . . No holes barred, it would > have all of the insults as these message threads. People just love > conflict, especially when it is passionate. Something like the Jerry > Springer show, for Oracle people . . .
Jerry Springer eh. This highlights exactly what you want from all this. To distract attention and turn what should be rational technical debates into a circus. To be involved in any "Jerry Springer" type show/debate would be simply abhorrent to me. My God, can you imagine the poor buggers out there having to endure this level of technical debate. If your postings here an example of what to expect from any such debate, I don't think I could ever live down the embarrassment.
Still, I have a little test for you coming up that might throw some light on all this ...
> It would be great fun, and educational too.
It might be fun for you and maybe for those like you that enjoy watching Jerry Springer but not for those that have a certain level integrity. As for educational, unfortunately, I doubt that as well. I mean, what have we learnt from you these past few days. Well, quite a bit actually, but nothing from a technical point of view...
> I'm sure that I could arrange for the sponsor to buy Nuno, HJR and > Foote a round-trip ticket to SF, and cover their hotel and meal > expenses, so costs will not be an issue.
> I'm sure that Ault and Niemiec will be on-board, so I await a response > for Nuno, Howard and Richard. . .
Don't you think it a little irrational and somewhat inappropriate that you would make such a suggestion with those that you are threatening with legal proceedings? Don't you think it a little inappropriate to make bullying and intimidating "face-to-face" threats and then challenge someone to a face-to-face debate ? I certainly do.
I tell you what. If it's an open, technical debate you want, if you think I and others have been unfair and incorrect in *any* technical assessments of your writings, let's put you to the test Don. I'll post a couple of the more recent "issues" that have been debated here recently regarding your writings in new, separate threads and I challenge you to openly, freely and above all technically debate and defend why such criticisms have been unwarranted.
Don, I've made this offer in the past, I make this offer yet again. Don, prove to us that you are indeed capable of conducting a civil, open, meaningful and above all technically based debate. Don, please explain why previous criticisms of your writings have been so unfair and so unjustified.
This is your chance Don to prove to everyone that you actually know what you talk about. Before we concern ourselves with "The Clash Of The Titians", let's be sure beforehand that we're not dealing here with a mouse ...
> > Don Burleson allegedly said,on my timestamp of 7/06/2004 11:29 PM:
> > NL> how appropriate
> It is, isn't it? :) > I'm beginning to think it is not Don in those messages. > Haven't run a trace yet, but will do soon. > He can't be that crazy to suggest we do not exist, after > publicly acknowledging our existence. Then again, he may be > in trouble to establish exactly who to "call through the > backdoor" and this could be a bit of social engineering in > action. Well, if he can't find me on the Net then he doesn't > deserve a reply.
> > NL> I suspect that this marks the first time the word organisation has been > > used in respect of the OakTable Network. I personally hope its the last.
> HmmmIdunno, actually reading the foreword to Connor's book: > "...Oaktable network is an informal organization..."...
> But what loses it for me is this: "...people have been admitted..." > I strongly dislike the suggestion of "admission panels" in anything to do > with professional associations. Too close to elite, something I refuse > to be involved or associated with. And God only knows how many of those > in the past have been responsible for the current state of Oracle myths. > Last thing anyone needs is another one. > But anyways it's just my opinion and everyone is of course welcome to > differ or ignore it. Fine with me.
> BTW the book is awesome so far, this just won me (if I may just reproduce > one sentence with apologies to the publisher):
> <We have deliberately avoided the term "performance" because > efficiency is more than just performance.>
> If that is not worth a shot of the best scotch to be found, I don't > know what is! > :)
> > NL> Of course an attitude like that is a prerequisite for Oak table > > membership :).
> I got it from an Oakie who was kind enough to write it down in his > book when asked to sign it. See, it works! ;)
> > NL> Nicely said.
> Yeah but I regret to say, unfortunately wasted... > It appears to be degenerating into another "mine is bigger than yours" > contest. Ah well, stuff it.
Funnily enough it was the copy editor who didn't like the term "bunch" and hence suggested "organisation". Yes, its true that admission is by vote but its simply to keep the numbers at bay - its not an attempt to be elitist, its an attempt to try not to reinvent usenet.
As far as I know, there's no fee, no perks, no secret handshake...maybe there is and no-one's told me yet :-)
So yeah, we're just a bunch of people who have a passion for Oracle itself, social discussion about Oracle, social discussion about whiskey, and well...pretty much social discussion about anything that takes our fancy.
