How about an Oracle debate?

39 views
Skip to first unread message

Don Burleson

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 9:29:12 AM6/7/04
to
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. . .

Michael Austin

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 10:46:21 AM6/7/04
to
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.

Michael Austin.

Glen A Stromquist

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 10:55:11 AM6/7/04
to
Michael Austin wrote:


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!

Noons

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 11:38:59 AM6/7/04
to
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.

--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam

Noons

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 12:32:41 PM6/7/04
to
Glen A Stromquist allegedly said,on my timestamp of 8/06/2004 12:55 AM:

>
> But I think you should also fly Sybrand in to moderate it...

Oh yes, please! LOL!

Marc Blum

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 3:06:12 PM6/7/04
to
On 7 Jun 2004 06:29:12 -0700, d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote:

<SNIPPED TROLL>


--
Marc Blum
mailto:blumN...@marcblum.de
http://www.marcblum.de

Paul Drake

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 3:21:48 PM6/7/04
to
Glen A Stromquist <glen_stromquist@no_spam_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<jl%wc.31273$jl6.17773@edtnps89>...

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!".

Pd

Rahul

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 3:35:36 PM6/7/04
to
Rather than tagging others, how about DB vs HJR only! that would be
educational and fun ;-)


Regds
Rahul.

Howard J. Rogers

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 3:55:37 PM6/7/04
to

"Rahul" <rahul...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f8af2f95.0406...@posting.google.com...

> 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.

Regards
HJR

Don Burleson

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 3:59:18 PM6/7/04
to
Hello Glen,

> 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. .
. .

Glen A Stromquist <glen_stromquist@no_spam_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<jl%wc.31273$jl6.17773@edtnps89>...

Sybrand Bakker

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 4:41:35 PM6/7/04
to
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.


--
Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

Niall Litchfield

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 4:57:15 PM6/7/04
to
"Don Burleson" <d...@burleson.cc> wrote in message
news:998d28f7.04060...@posting.google.com...

> Hello Glen,
>
> > 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.


--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com


Niall Litchfield

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 5:14:30 PM6/7/04
to
"Noons" <wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam> wrote in message
news:40c48c12$0$31679$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

Don Burleson allegedly said,on my timestamp of 7/06/2004 11:29 PM:

NL> how appropriate

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.

NL> Nicely said.

Glen A Stromquist

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 5:48:16 PM6/7/04
to
Don Burleson wrote:

> Hello Glen,
>
>
>>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...


Joel Garry

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 8:10:40 PM6/7/04
to
d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote in message news:<998d28f7.04060...@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. . .

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056405/#comment

hrishy

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 10:24:00 PM6/7/04
to
Hi Don

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..

regards
Hrishy

Noons

unread,
Jun 7, 2004, 10:40:09 PM6/7/04
to
"Niall Litchfield" <niall.li...@dial.pipex.com> wrote in message news:<40c4daa2$0$20510$cc9e...@news-text.dial.pipex.com>...

> 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.

Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam

Marc Blum

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 1:37:05 AM6/8/04
to
On 7 Jun 2004 12:59:18 -0700, d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote:

<BORING BULLSHIT>

hrishy

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 3:22:18 AM6/8/04
to
Hi

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 ..

regards
Hrishy

Noons <wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam> wrote in message news:<40c48c12$0$31679$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>...

Michel Cadot

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 5:56:17 AM6/8/04
to

"Howard J. Rogers" <h...@dizwell.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:40c4c829$0$8988$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

>
> It's not fun to see a professional issue descend to the "people love
> conflict" level.

I completly and definitively agree.

Regards
Michel Cadot

>
> Regards
> HJR
>


Michel Cadot

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 5:57:42 AM6/8/04
to

"Marc Blum" <bl...@marcblum.de> a écrit dans le message de
news:14f9c0d8ruifqooa8...@4ax.com...

> On 7 Jun 2004 06:29:12 -0700, d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote:
>
> <SNIPPED TROLL>
>

Yes ! Nothing to add.

Regards
Michel Cadot

Richard Foote

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 8:22:20 AM6/8/04
to

"Don Burleson" <d...@burleson.cc> wrote in message
news:998d28f7.04060...@posting.google.com...
> Hello Glen,
>
> > 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.

Please.

Richard


Richard Foote

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 8:33:29 AM6/8/04
to
Comments embedded.

"Don Burleson" <d...@burleson.cc> wrote in message
news:998d28f7.04060...@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.

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 ...

Dare ya.

Richard


Noons

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 8:59:40 AM6/8/04
to
Richard Foote allegedly said,on my timestamp of 8/06/2004 10:33 PM:

> talk about. Before we concern ourselves with "The Clash Of The Titians",

Titians?
ROFL!

Connor McDonald

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 9:47:26 AM6/8/04
to

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.

Cheers
Connor
--
Connor McDonald
Co-author: "Mastering Oracle PL/SQL - Practical Solutions"
ISBN: 1590592174

web: http://www.oracledba.co.uk
web: http://www.oaktable.net
email: connor_...@yahoo.com

Coming Soon! "Oracle Insight - Tales of the OakTable"

"GIVE a man a fish and he will eat for a day. But TEACH him how to fish,
and...he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day"

------------------------------------------------------------

Dusan Bolek

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 9:51:59 AM6/8/04
to
d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote in message news:<998d28f7.04060...@posting.google.com>...

<proposal snipped, anyone here knows what we are talking about>

I do not think that any truth can came out of TV style debate. It
would be too shallow, too personal, full of unsubstantiated claims. It
is going to look like:

HJR: Your index knowledge is crap.
DB: It isn't.
HJR: In your article published in ... on ... you stated that ... and
that's simply not true.
DB: According to MY NUMBERS from MY TESTING, this is how indexes in
Oracle are working.
HJR: According to MY NUMBERS from MY TESTING, this is utterly crap.
DB: It isn't.
HJR: It is.
DB: It isn't.
HJR: It is. Your test is ill-founded because of ...
DB: It isn't, your test is ill-founded because of ...
SPEAKER: Ok, we have to pause this one hour online debate for two
weeks, because we need to replay mentioned tests of both sides.

I think the point is obvious. Oracle internals are too complicated
matter to be discussed thoroughly during one hour debate. The end of
the debate will be even more hatred in the air and two groups each of
them proclaiming its winning and blaming other one for unfair and
unsubstantiated arguments. With supporters of both sides celebrating
win of their team.

--
Dusan Bolek
http://www.db-support.com

Email: spa...@seznam.cz
Pls add "Not Guilty" to the subject, otherwise your email will face an
unpleasant end as SPAM.

Richard Foote

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 9:52:53 AM6/8/04
to
"Noons" <wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam> wrote in message
news:40c5b839$0$31679$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

> Richard Foote allegedly said,on my timestamp of 8/06/2004 10:33 PM:
>
> > talk about. Before we concern ourselves with "The Clash Of The Titians",
>
> Titians?
> ROFL!
>

Hi Nuno,

Humour at last !!

Ooopps, and I didn't even mean it

Actually, I prefer my term, it's probably more accurate :)

Cheers

Richard


Richard Foote

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 9:58:16 AM6/8/04
to
"Dusan Bolek" <pages...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:1e8276d6.04060...@posting.google.com...

> d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote in message
news:<998d28f7.04060...@posting.google.com>...
>
> <proposal snipped, anyone here knows what we are talking about>
>
> I do not think that any truth can came out of TV style debate. It
> would be too shallow, too personal, full of unsubstantiated claims. It
> is going to look like:
>
> HJR: Your index knowledge is crap.
> DB: It isn't.
> HJR: In your article published in ... on ... you stated that ... and
> that's simply not true.
> DB: According to MY NUMBERS from MY TESTING, this is how indexes in
> Oracle are working.
> HJR: According to MY NUMBERS from MY TESTING, this is utterly crap.
> DB: It isn't.
> HJR: It is.
> DB: It isn't.
> HJR: It is. Your test is ill-founded because of ...
> DB: It isn't, your test is ill-founded because of ...
> SPEAKER: Ok, we have to pause this one hour online debate for two
> weeks, because we need to replay mentioned tests of both sides.
>

Hi Dusan,

Exactly, I wouldn't be able to get a bloody word in ....

Cheers ;)

Richard


Noons

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 10:06:22 AM6/8/04
to
Connor McDonald allegedly said,on my timestamp of 8/06/2004 11:47 PM:


> 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.

a club? :)

Like I said:
"But anyways it's just my opinion and everyone is of course welcome to
differ or ignore it. Fine with me."

Awesome book so far, BTW. Got it today and have already found some very
interesting concepts there. Definitely material to try in the next project.
Is it kosher to bounce one or two questions off you later on?

Alan

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 10:10:23 AM6/8/04
to

"Sybrand Bakker" <gooid...@sybrandb.verwijderdit.demon.nl> wrote in
message news:ldk9c01h6lcvra9db...@4ax.com...

> 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.

Technically, it's libel. Slander is the spoken form. Anyway, although you
may not like what he said, it does not raise to the level of libel (see New
York Time Co. vs. Sullivan 1964). He has to have malice (he may) and know
that what he wrote is incorrect. He has stated opinion, and reported on his
research. If he actually found resumes with verifiable details or photos,
and then made these claims, that would be a different story. Too bad there's
no law against being an ignoramous.

Galen Boyer

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 10:12:12 AM6/8/04
to
Don,

Although this attempt at trying to say Howard has been defaming
you and should stand up and be a man and debate you in person,
I'd much rather see the results of research. I don't want to see
who is a better public debater. I would guess you might be
better at that than anyone in this forum. You probably are quite
confident at your ability to defend yourself in public. But, I
would also hazard a guess that you author your books much the
same way. Instead of doing solid research and then authoring a
book about it, you just wing it. Well, then very talented people
such as Howard read your haphazardly thrown together conclusions
and say things like "this is just plain wrong". They post fact
after fact showing why they are correct and why you are wrong.
You can't refute their claims, so instead you decide, "Hey, if I
get them in a forum where I'm really good, I'll finally be able
to win". Well, I for one, don't want to know who is the best
debater. I want to learn about Oracle. From what I read from
these threads, I won't be reading your books for this knowledge
and I will be making sure every Oracle professional I meet knows
to stay away from your material as well.

--
Galen Boyer

ctc...@hotmail.com

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 1:05:13 PM6/8/04
to
d...@burleson.cc (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"!

In other words, whenever you debate in this forum you get your ass handed
to you, because your opponents can gather examples, trace files, and block
dumps to prove that they are right and you are wrong. So now you want to
move to a live forum, where recourse cannot be had to, horror or horrors,
actual evidence.

Xho

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Joel Garry

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 2:23:12 PM6/8/04
to
d...@burleson.cc (Don Burleson) wrote in message news:<998d28f7.04060...@posting.google.com>...
> Hello Glen,
>
> > 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. .
> . .
>

THE THREE STOOGES VERSUS GODZILLA, MOTHRA AND REPTILICUS

[Scene: immense hall will millions of identically dressed chinese
people.
On stage 3 stooges are arguing, with a translator following along
displaying ideographs on large screen behind stage. English
translation of large screen in subtitles on bottom of frame.]

Moe: Waddaya mean, you forgot the ratio scripts?
Larry: Well Moe, you said to bring the laptops, so I got those dancers
from last night!
[Stock shot of oriental cathouse girls on large screen]
[translation says "Honorable programming team increases productivity
through teamwork."]
Moe: You knuclehead! Now we'll have to buy OEM options and setup
another database! And we only have a warchalked 80211b/g connection!
[Moe moves to hit Larry with Playstation, Larry ducks and Curly gets
bonked in the nose.]
Curly: Hey! I was almost through Blood Lust 6!
Larry: [Sits down, defeated, with hands on face] NLS again!
Moe: Aw, just hook up Curly for the antenna.
[Larry and Moe hook wires up to Curly, who lights up and has gran mal
seizure.]
[Large screen shows graph with "sqlserver transactions" S-curve
levelling off and asymptotic line labelled "Oracle transactions".]
[translation: "We will defeat warmongering Capitalist pigdog hegemony
through a grand alliance with most honorable worm programmers!"]
[Stock scene of immense hall cheering. Stooges bow, hitting each
others heads.]
[Stock scene of crowded oriental city. Superimposed picture of
Buckwheat with large boombox strutting along, playing OOW theme song.
Cut to scenes of Godzilla holding head and moaning in pain, Mothra
flying in random patterns, and upset looking Reptilicus swimming up
from bottom of ocean.]
[Cut to stooges having difficulty getting into rickshaw. Buckwheat
walks by, Curly drops to ground and starts spinning around when he
hears the music.
Curly gets up, runs into crowd leaving great hall, knocking them over
like dominoes. Curly runs back to rickshaw.]
Moe: You idiot! Those are our subcontractors!
Curly: Sorry Moe! I don't know what happened.
[Stooges beat on each other.]
Larry: Wait! What's that?
[Face shot of Buckwheat mouthing O.]
[Mothra starts flapping wings, stock shots of cyclone. Stooges get
swept up and fly through the air waving arms.]
Curly: Woowoowoo!
[Stock shots of Godzilla rampaging through city. Squishing sound as
Godzilla stomps on stooges.]
Reptilicus: Hey guys, leave some for me!
Shemp: Tell me about it.
[Theme song.]

The monsters have to be real, I've seen pictures of them.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.

Talk about credibility gap:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20040604-1557-simpson-10yearslater.html

Frank van Bortel

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 2:30:49 PM6/8/04
to

ROFL!
--

Regards,
Frank van Bortel

Niall Litchfield

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 4:32:18 PM6/8/04
to
"Alan" <al...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:2ilvmgF...@uni-berlin.de...

>
> "Sybrand Bakker" <gooid...@sybrandb.verwijderdit.demon.nl> wrote in
> message news:ldk9c01h6lcvra9db...@4ax.com...
> > 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.
>
> Technically, it's libel. Slander is the spoken form.

I agree.

>Anyway, although you
> may not like what he said, it does not raise to the level of libel (see
New
> York Time Co. vs. Sullivan 1964). He has to have malice (he may) and know
> that what he wrote is incorrect. He has stated opinion, and reported on
his
> research. If he actually found resumes with verifiable details or photos,
> and then made these claims, that would be a different story. Too bad
there's
> no law against being an ignoramous.

Well as it would appear that he has bothered to find out who people worked
for and then threatened to sue their employers (something that I and one
other have asked about the truth of directly and not even received the
courtesy of a reply) it would seem that there is plenty of evidence that he
knows who these people are and that what he wrote was incorrect and that he
knew it to be so.For example, Howard has a brief resume on the site that
appears in his signature and his name at the very least appears on his
published work Beginning Oracle Programming. I'd be quite frankly amazed if
there wasn't a photograph there as well, but I don't have the book (sorry
Howard et al). I too have never met Richard or seen a photograph - however I
don't doubt his existence (someone is buying all those David Bowie albums)
and anyway *someone* wrote the Indexing Myths paper.

So it is of course possible that a former Information Technology Professor
doesn't have the skills to do the above research - though you know somehow I
doubt it. What can't be said is that any competent research was done. I find
it highly difficult to attribute anything other than malice to someone who
resorts to petty name calling rather than addressing the technical issues at
hand.

Now, I am not a lawyer and not qualified to state whether the above adds up
to a case for libel, and if they did I would think it a bad thing for other
reasons. It certainly however detracts from the professional reputation of
Don for him to be associated with all this bluster, threatening behaviour
and abuse. In fact I would probably have made no comment at all on this
thread, or the previous 9i new features thread, were it not for the
appalling posts that Don has made. Not appalling in a technical sense since
they are devoid of technical content, but appalling in an abusive manner.

On the other hand making errors is something we all do. For example - since
indexing myths started this - in response to a question about why you
wouldn't want to use bitmap indexes in an OLTP environment I said

"In principle it works like this

For each and every piece of DML the entire bitmap has to be recalculated."

which is just wrong as Jonathan explained here http://tinyurl.com/2mmfe
You'll have to take my word for it but suing him for damage to my reputation
never once entered my mind. I was wrong and its a good thing that this was
corrected. In fact if Richard wants to put it in his paper that would be
fine too. The important thing I hope is that we can agree that the whole
profession benefits from rigorous technical analysis and professional
quality behaviour.

Niall Litchfield

unread,
Jun 8, 2004, 4:35:55 PM6/8/04
to
I think he wanted to paint us a picture :(

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com

"Noons" <wizo...@yahoo.com.au.nospam> wrote in message
news:40c5b839$0$31679$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

Daniel Morgan

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 1:36:50 AM6/9/04
to
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 . . .
>

> 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. . .

Before reading this I made both of you an offer to host it at
the University of Washington. I might also be able to arrange
a venue at the University of California at Berkeley.

Though there is a part of me that thinks the Jerry Springer
show might end up being the better location.

Do you guys really want to do it?

Burleson, Ault and Niemiec on one side
Lewis, Foote, and Howards on the other?

Tom Kyte as referee?
March 19th, 2005?
Let me know!
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damo...@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Howard J. Rogers

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 1:57:35 AM6/9/04
to

"Daniel Morgan" <damo...@x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:1086759423.485286@yasure...
[snip]

> Before reading this I made both of you an offer to host it at
> the University of Washington. I might also be able to arrange
> a venue at the University of California at Berkeley.
>
> Though there is a part of me that thinks the Jerry Springer
> show might end up being the better location.
>
> Do you guys really want to do it?


Of course I don't. This newsgroup is a perfectly viable, successful and
sensible forum in which to air differences of technical opinion, as Mike
Ault can now attest. And if Don ever got off his behind and contributed
anything of technical worth here, he'd find out too. What this clown wants,
however, is a forum in which "entertainment" is valued above technical
ability, because he knows that in a Jerry Springer style environment, his
technical inadequacies are not going to be put under nearly as much scrutiny
as they can be here.

Regards
HJR

Jim Kennedy

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 2:09:44 AM6/9/04
to

"Howard J. Rogers" <h...@dizwell.com> wrote in message
news:40c6a6b9$0$3035$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Are all the participants going to have to wear those Hill Billy teeth? (to
give it more of a Jerry Springer look)
Jim


Howard J. Rogers

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 2:22:07 AM6/9/04
to

"Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-downwit...@attbi.net> wrote in message
news:IQxxc.65105$eY2.12457@attbi_s02...

> Are all the participants going to have to wear those Hill Billy teeth? (to
> give it more of a Jerry Springer look)
> Jim

As I believe I've already posted elsewhere, the mere fact that you (and
others) find the proposal amusing means Don's already achieved what he set
out to achieve by making it.... distracting people from paying attention to
his unprofessional tactics of *suppressing* debate and technical scrutiny by
approaching one's employers if you cross him.

It isn't a cause for hilarity, I hope, to discover this man knows very
little technically about Oracle, but that he will threaten you, abuse you,
and try and get you sacked to stop that little nugget of truth being made
public.

Regards
HJR


Connor McDonald

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 8:07:27 AM6/9/04
to

feel free...email in the sig

cheers
connor

Tyler Smith Watu

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 9:52:40 AM6/9/04
to
"Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-downwit...@attbi.net> wrote in message news:<IQxxc.65105$eY2.12457@attbi_s02>...


Thanks Jim .That was the best laugh I have had all month.

Some of us who participate in this newsgroup
benefit a lot from what some of the more experienced
folks have to say and give back the little we can.

Hopefully there is no background information
to your exchanges we are unaware of, if there is
too bad.

As much as Don and Horward have both contributed
meaningful material to the Oracle community, there
could have been mistakes on both sides somewhere
along the line.

My opinion is that there is nothing really wrong
in correcting some one and if anyone beleives
that they are above correction tough,but
the modus operandi matters a lot.
We are bound to defend ourselves or react
defensively when confronted in certain ways
which may be considered inappropriate
EVEN if we are caught pants down.

Teaching,consulting developing for the most is a business
and if anyone beleives sticking out how long you have done it
, how you did it , where you did it and sometimes even with
whom you did it adds credibility, ride on brother.
Is that not why a Havard MBA is considered "better" than
a ******* State University MBA(Not to insult anyone )

Instead of Jerry I will prescribe WWF or the WBA fight.

Lately the heavy weight division does not seem to
have the "MAN" .This makes anyone who beleives they
are good threaten to get the Heavy Weight Title
Roy Jones before his knockout threatened,now it is Tarver.
Put on some weight and step up people.
(Do not complain about your weight like
Oscar did after virtually loosing to Sturm)
Braithewaite is kind of dominant in the cruiser weight
so do not even think of going there.The easiest way
to commit suicide is to try Bernard Hopkins


Horward I am waiting for your
10g paper from Dizwell and Don how about
the next Oracle Internals

TY

Jim Kennedy

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 10:14:46 AM6/9/04
to

"Howard J. Rogers" <h...@dizwell.com> wrote in message
news:40c6ac78$0$1588$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

Howard,
I'm not for a Jerry Springer type "discussion", it isn't something I would
waste my time watching. I take a more scientific approach to Oracle and so
I find it difficult to see how a major controversy should arise. (assuming
that there is a reasoned scientific approach) Just trying to inject a
little humor.
Jim


Rahul

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 5:12:13 PM6/9/04
to
HJR,

I think the fun part that most of the audiences are referring is to
see, you shutup DB once and for all.

Regds,
Rahul.

"Howard J. Rogers" <h...@dizwell.com> wrote in message news:<40c6ac78$0$1588$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>...

Joel Garry

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 7:55:38 PM6/9/04
to

Howard J. Rogers

unread,
Jun 9, 2004, 9:33:26 PM6/9/04
to

"Rahul" <rahul...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f8af2f95.04060...@posting.google.com...

> HJR,
>
> I think the fun part that most of the audiences are referring is to
> see, you shutup DB once and for all.
>
> Regds,
> Rahul.


Strangely enough, I don't actually want to shut Don up at all. I want him to
engage here on technical matters. I want him to share the things he knows,
and learn some things he doesn't appear to know. And I want him to do all of
that in the spirit of free, scientific, academically rigorous discourse that
usually informs the technical discussions here. Meaning, I want him to
forego the use of bullying legal intimidation before he starts.

Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see Don become a regular
poster here, one amongst his peers, just a poster amongst many, from whom we
might or might not learn as time passes and the mood and subject allows.

But it won't happen, I suspect, because he's too busy claiming exalted guru
status and thinking he's better than the rest of us.

Regards
HJR

Daniel Morgan

unread,
Jun 10, 2004, 8:43:43 PM6/10/04
to
Howard J. Rogers wrote:

Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)

Noons

unread,
Jun 11, 2004, 6:05:49 AM6/11/04
to
Daniel Morgan allegedly said,on my timestamp of 11/06/2004 10:43 AM:


>
> Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)
>

*another*?????
:)

Daniel Morgan

unread,
Jun 11, 2004, 9:23:52 AM6/11/04
to
Noons wrote:

> Daniel Morgan allegedly said,on my timestamp of 11/06/2004 10:43 AM:
>
>
>>
>> Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)
>>
>
> *another*?????
> :)

I have a little boat.
http://www.advtechserv.com/files/si.html

I thought another one would be sort of nice. ;-)

Noons

unread,
Jun 11, 2004, 9:30:04 AM6/11/04
to
Daniel Morgan allegedly said,on my timestamp of 11/06/2004 11:23 PM:

>>> Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> *another*?????
>> :)
>
>
> I have a little boat.
> http://www.advtechserv.com/files/si.html
>
> I thought another one would be sort of nice. ;-)
>


Humpfh......
(not bad, BTW. Bugger, that must be some COLD water. Brrrr!)

Glen A Stromquist

unread,
Jun 11, 2004, 10:38:09 AM6/11/04
to
Noons wrote:
> Daniel Morgan allegedly said,on my timestamp of 11/06/2004 11:23 PM:
>
>>>> Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> *another*?????
>>> :)
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a little boat.
>> http://www.advtechserv.com/files/si.html
>>
>> I thought another one would be sort of nice. ;-)
>>
>
>
> Humpfh......
> (not bad, BTW. Bugger, that must be some COLD water. Brrrr!)
>
>
Nice!

Ever take it up further north than Nanaimo?

Daniel Morgan

unread,
Jun 12, 2004, 4:09:40 PM6/12/04
to

Hawaii west.
Panama canal south.

The Nanaimo run was a just a short vacation.

Eventually the goal is south to Ecuador, west forever.

Noons

unread,
Jun 13, 2004, 7:13:58 AM6/13/04
to
Daniel Morgan apparently said,on my timestamp of 13/06/2004 6:09 AM:

>
> Eventually the goal is south to Ecuador, west forever.

Good. I'll have the single malt
ready for your arrival, hombre! :)

Jeff

unread,
Jun 14, 2004, 8:20:42 AM6/14/04
to
In article <1086960248.235436@yasure>, Daniel Morgan <damo...@x.washington.edu> wrote:
>Noons wrote:
>
>> Daniel Morgan allegedly said,on my timestamp of 11/06/2004 10:43 AM:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> *another*?????
>> :)
>
>I have a little boat.
>http://www.advtechserv.com/files/si.html
>
>I thought another one would be sort of nice. ;-)

Sing it with me now...

"A three-hour tour. A three-hour tour."

I prefer Mary Ann, BTW.

Daniel Morgan

unread,
Jun 15, 2004, 9:53:23 AM6/15/04
to
Jeff wrote:

A recruiting phrase I recall was "Join the Navy and ride the WAVES."

If you aren't familiar with the US Military you'll have a small amount
of research required to sort that one out.

Joel Garry

unread,
Jun 15, 2004, 5:15:04 PM6/15/04
to
Daniel Morgan <damo...@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1087307621.713301@yasure>...

> Jeff wrote:
>
> > In article <1086960248.235436@yasure>, Daniel Morgan <damo...@x.washington.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>Noons wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Daniel Morgan allegedly said,on my timestamp of 11/06/2004 10:43 AM:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Darn ... I thought I was going to be able to buy another boat. ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>*another*?????
> >>>:)
> >>
> >>I have a little boat.
> >>http://www.advtechserv.com/files/si.html
> >>
> >>I thought another one would be sort of nice. ;-)
> >
> >
> > Sing it with me now...
> >
> > "A three-hour tour. A three-hour tour."
> >
> > I prefer Mary Ann, BTW.
>
> A recruiting phrase I recall was "Join the Navy and ride the WAVES."
>
> If you aren't familiar with the US Military you'll have a small amount
> of research required to sort that one out.

There was a Village People song called "Join the Navy" that the Navy
almost used in a recruitment drive. Fortunately for them they did
some research before they got egg (or something) on their face.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.

http://www.bobdenver.com/Gilligan_s_Guest_Stars/The_Pilot_Page/The_Howells/The_Original_Crew/The_SS_Minnow/the_ss_minnow.html

Jeff

unread,
Jun 16, 2004, 8:16:19 AM6/16/04
to
In article <1087307621.713301@yasure>, Daniel Morgan <damo...@x.washington.edu> wrote:

>A recruiting phrase I recall was "Join the Navy and ride the WAVES."
>
>If you aren't familiar with the US Military you'll have a small amount
>of research required to sort that one out.

Familiar enough to know that "waves" were women... Navy nurses back in WW2, I
believe. Hey, I watched my share of "Black Sheep Squadron." :-)

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages