Ted,
My reasons are as follows:
1) The thread started with this question:
>>I'll be interested to see the next set of OT/non-OT stats. What are
you all screaming about in OT?<<
I don't see what that has to do with VFP or why I would want it to come
up in a search result.
2) It eventually wandered over to the fact that, if you search, by
default OT WAS checked (thanks Ed.) Did this really need to be done in
the main area? Would it have worked just as well as an OT/NF thread?
Ed certainly reads those as well.
3) It also became a debate on how important OT threads were in the
overall scheme of things. Again, this is a good topic, but I would
think it would work just as well as an OT/NF.
4) I am under the impression that people were frustrated that, when they
did a search, they ended up getting a large number of hits that involved
conversations that had nothing to do with VFP. Given that this entire
thread (and sub threads) have nothing to do with VFP, should they be OT
or NF? As a VFP developer, trying to find an answer to a problem, I
have yet to see any of these threads contain information that would be
relevant to me. And these threads can't even be filtered out because no
one bothered to make them NF or OT.
5) I guess it depends on how you (and the others) define the criteria
for OT/NF. Mine (which is apparently wrong) is that, if the content
doesn't apply to solving/addressing/posing/etc. a VFP type problem, it
should be OT/NF.
So at this point, I will just bow out of this whole silly argument since
Ed has resolved one key part and the other is up to the members to
figure out, not me. And hopefully, they will do it OT/NF so I can get
back to VFP type stuff.
Take care,
Fletcher
-----Original Message-----
From: profoxtech-bounces /AT/ leafe .DO.T com [mailto:profoxtech-bounces@leafe.com]
On Behalf Of Ted Roche
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 6:05 AM
To: profoxtech /AT/ leafe .DO.T com
Subject: Re: Must ... stay ... on topic ... Shouldn't this be OT or NF
????
Fletcher:
The reason this is on-topic is pretty obvious:
An observation was made, the problem was discussed, alternative
solutions were proposed, and a solution was implemented.
On Jun 29, 2005, at 2:28 PM, Johnson, Fletcher S (N-Superior
Technical Resources Inc.) wrote:
> Does anyone see the humor in that all the people complaining about the
> quality of messages in the system and that these messages have nothing
> to do with Fox are posting those gripes without using the [OT] or [NF]
> in the subject line?
"all the people" would be Nancy, making a legitimate observation
about the value of the FoxPro resource in the archive?
This has everything to do with FoxPro.
> How can they complain when they are clearly causing part of the
> problem
> about which they complain?
Nonsense.
[excessive quoting removed by server]
©2005 Johnson, Fletcher S (N-Superior Technical Resources Inc.) |
