Prelim Contact re Possible Meeting
Scott
Here's a constructive suggestion.
Why don't you invite Jim Mantle to the meeting with Bell.
Considering that there will be more than one person present from Bell,
there is nothing wrong with having 2 of you present and representing the
users.
Jim at least uses HSE himself and is very much up to date on the technical
issues and problems users are facing.
He also spends a lot of his spare time helping people on this NG, so he
deserves to be there.
That is of course, if Jim is willing to attend.
So how about it Jim ?
I know as a user I'd like to see two unrelated parties attend a meeting that
affects users as a whole.
"Richard Virtue" <RVi...@SympaticoUsers.org> wrote in message
news:13vA5.275868$Gh.73...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Just heard from one of Andre D'Avignon's section managers, that he (Andre)
> is currently in the midst of a change of residences. However, he may be
in
> Ottawa next week and hopes we may have a chance to get together for lunch
> and a face-to-face chat. No particular agenda.
>
> My first impression is that it likely has more to do with 'human
relations'
> than with anything substantial. But one never knows. I suppose it could
> produce some answers to some of my recent inquiries as posted on the SUorg
> website. (No direct responses have been forthcoming lately.) In any
case,
> I gave my usual reply that my time is free and I'm willing to meet and
talk
> with any of them any time they wish, as long as they understand that I
can't
> speak for anyone but myself in the circumstances.
>
> Obviously, this is all very preliminary and rather vague. I shall, of
> course, post follow-ups if anything actually does happen. But please
don't
> anticipate anything very significant. It's more likely that they want to
> yell at me for getting and passing along too much info already rather than
> giving me any more.
>
> Ref & Follow-Up: http://sympaticousers.org/action/meeting2_pre.htm
>
> Discussion Item: http://sympaticousers.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000058.html
>
> --
> Regards, Richard Virtue
> http://SympaticoUsers.org/
>
>
Scott
In keeping with the way you like to run su.org why don't you simply put up a
discussion thread as to what you think the users want.
The question should be simple, unbiased and uneditorialized.
An example.
"It has been suggested that Jim Mantle should accompany me to the meeting
with Andre D'Avignon in order to return with two people's perspectives of
the meeting when reporting back to the users as well providing more input
to Bell.
Jim is willing to attend if invited. As users would you be for or opposed to
Jim Mantle being present during this meeting ?"
And lets let the users decide.
Richard, it seems rather strange to me that if this was just a casual
"personal pleasantries" lunch that you would have posted it on the front
page of su.org, setup a discussion topic about it already and asked for
users input on the meeting and came into the newsgroup to announce it
publicly. Obviously it affects all of us. Users should have a say on who
attends.
Wouldn't you agree ?
I keep seeing your and Jacques' comments of "instead of critizing the way
things are run at su.org
why don't you do something to make it better." Well I am making a good
suggestion.
One that makes a lot of sense to a lot of users. Do the right thing and act
upon it.
"Richard Virtue" <RVi...@SympaticoUsers.org> wrote in message
news:waVA5.278911$Gh.75...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Well, first of all, this is not "my" meeting. And, since I'm not the
host,
> I'm really not in a position to invite anyone. Besides, according to
> Scott's previous advice: "When will you realise that all your emails to
Bell
> are being sent to /dev/null and that they don't care about you, your web
> site or the users?" So it's probably all just a waste of time anyhow. ;)
>
> TTYL,
> Richard.
>
>
Crowe
Always ,always, that last little jab. You could not just leave it as "Well I
agree with your initiative Scott, and applaud it. " , you just had to add
the "See now, that didn't hurt at all."
(sigh)
"Jacques E. Bouchard" <jebou...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8FBE1F9E0jebo...@206.172.150.50...
> smat...@nospamyahoo.com (Scott) wrote in
> <sBVA5.278919$Gh.75...@news20.bellglobal.com>:
>
> >I keep seeing your and Jacques' comments of "instead of critizing the
> >way things are run at su.org
> >why don't you do something to make it better." Well I am making a good
> >suggestion.
> >One that makes a lot of sense to a lot of users. Do the right thing and
> >act upon it.
>
> Well I agree with your initiative Scott, and applaud it. See now,
> that didn't hurt at all.
>
>
>
>
> jaybee
Jim Mantle
the multi-part).
> Scott wrote:
> >
> > Richard, it seems rather strange to me that if this was just a casual
> > "personal pleasantries" lunch that you would have posted it on the front
> > page of su.org, setup a discussion topic about it already and asked for
> > users input on the meeting and came into the newsgroup to announce it
> > publicly.
Prior to any meeting, Richard has always disclosed 100% of his contacts
with Bell [though individual sentences and topics may have been
off-the-record]. By doing this there is no after-the-fact surprise that
he met with someone two weeks ago, and there are no comments like "When
were you going to tell us, Richard? What do you have to hide?"
Similarly, when find myself in the undesireable position of being
scheduled to referee a soccer game where my daughter is playing, before
the game I go to the opposing coach and point out my daughter, and tell
him of our relationship. The coach says thanks. During the course of the
game, the opposing coach will watch to see if there is any bias, or if a
fair game is being called - and I've never had any problem. If I conceal
the relationship, and the coach/team finds out afterwards, they will
wonder why I did not tell them, they will replay the game in their minds
to see if there was any bias in the calls, and even then, there will
still be a shadow of doubt or uncertainty.
Jim
Malcolm
No, I'm sure you're alone in this. Are you the dog that sits on the
porch and barks at EVERYONE that walks by on the sidewalk?
If there were any reason to post _something_ like this, the quotes in it
would resolve the issue.
IOW, lay off of Richard. You're barking up the wrong tree.
--
Malcolm
Warren May
Warren.
--
It's obvious where sympatico should be when replying.
"Crowe" <cro...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:KiGD5.7022$oN2.1...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Sherlock Holmes and Richard went on a camping trip.
>
> After a good meal and a bottle of wine, they lay down for the night and
went
> to sleep.
>
> Some hours later, Holmes awoke and nudged his friend. "Richard, look up
and
> tell me what you see."
>
> Richard replied, "I see millions and millions of stars."
>
> "What does that tell you?"
>
> Richard pondered for a minute. "Astronomically, it tells me that there are
> millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically,
I
> observe that Saturn is in Leo. Horologically, I deduce that the time is
> approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, I can see that God is
all
> powerful and that we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, I
> suspect that we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. Why, what does it tell
> YOU?"
>
> Holmes was silent for a minute, then spoke. "Richard, you idiot. Some jerk
> has stolen our tent."
ryan b
"Tony Reed" <Cal...@Sympatico.CA> wrote in message
news:slrn8t6l5s...@kubrick.localnet...
> Richard Virtue <RVi...@SympaticoUsers.org> wrote:
> :
> :Please just ignore it. I can't imagine that any thoughtful person could
> :possibly take it seriously for even a minute. In the first, place, I
don't
> :recall saying that I was worried about anything in the least. And, as
for
> :the hardware issue, let's get real for cripes sake! What about the
building
> :the machine is located in and what about the network it's connected to.
I
> :don't own those either. Is that also a problem? I certainly hope not
'cuz
> :I sure as hell can't afford to buy those -- especially the latter. :)
>
> Shucks, gosh, golly, he's just one of the boys. You really were a
> guvamant civil servant, weren't you? What school do you go to where
> they teach that kind of mealy-mouth?
>
> :To what extent that impact is deliberate or just thoughtless I'll leave
for
> :others to judge for themselves, but I doubt very much that many people
will
> :think it highly desirable.
>
> ... and it should be stamped out, right Dickie? There must be some way
> your detractors can be forced to shut up, eh Rick? Jacques-boots down
> Sherbrooke-strasse, that's the answer.
>
> --
> Tony Reed (paying customer)
> <Cal...@Sympatico.CA>
Jacques E. Bouchard
>You _are_ that barking dog! I suspected as much.
>
>I am neither a nut case nor Richard's acolyte. You were just ragging on
>another user for no reason and I objected.
Oh, they don't like that, Malcolm. They don't like that at all. Be
careful, they're liable to try and dig up some dirt, like the time you
posted on alt.binaries.smurfette.
See, they're just claiming their God-given right to nip at Richard's
ankles, and no one bettermake them accountable for it, or else...
jaybee
Jacques E. Bouchard
<slrn8trojp...@kubrick.lan>:
>Dantu <da...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>:Malcolm
>:
>: It's okay, this person is a paying customer and can rant and rave
>:about anything he wishes. Of course, he insists that you, another paying
>:customer, should go elsewhere to post what you want.
>
>Another acolyte heard from.
>
>I don't think I suggested anything like that. I suggested that your
>co-worshiper should put in his kill-file if he didn't like my posts.
Hey, here's a clue: why don't YOU killfile Richard Virtue, and save
us all the pain of listening to your moaning?
jaybee
Jacques E. Bouchard
<tdQD5.8231$oN2.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>:
>Well written, and with a rapier wit. ROFLMAO!
Yes, just not Crowe's wit. Old joke, written by someone else.
jaybee
Jacques E. Bouchard
<rTlG5.350327$1h3.8...@news20.bellglobal.com>:
>Welcome back Jock, you just get out or did one of yer gerbils get loose?
>
>Onethousandmonkeys can't be wrong :)
And I see that Crowe's been digging around some more. If you persist,
maybe you can unearth that terrible secret about the time I wore white
socks with dress shoes, and you can "expose" me for it.
jaybee
(You know your opponents are grasping at straws when all they can manage is
a feeble attempt at deforming your name...)