Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's
From: Bill Sanderson (Bill_Sanderson_at_msn.com.plugh.org)
Date: 10/07/03
- Next message: Phil Weldon: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- Previous message: Bill Sanderson: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- In reply to: Keith W. McCammon: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- Next in thread: Jason: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 13:02:47 -0400
Here's one thing that is different: They are providing a web interface, and
integrating it into Help and Support, so that it appears as "part of the
product."
I think this is a good deal of where this sense of betrayal is coming from,
and that it isn't unjustified.
"Keith W. McCammon" <km@km.com> wrote in message
news:ulZo6mOjDHA.3284@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Most people that use this knowledge base either did not
> > realise this and supplied their correct email address or
> > trusted the M.S. site.
>
> I'm not trying to take anyone's side, but I would like to point out the
> broader issues at hand here (issues older and larger than those that you
> describe relating to Microsoft's own newsgroup servers).
>
> Every single newsreader of which I am aware asks for an e-mail address.
> This is true if you are pulling news from microsoft.public.*, or from
> comp.os,*, or from alt.*. Usenet, as an information exchange forum, was
> designed to use e-mail addresses as part of the post. All Usenet servers
of
> which I am aware require an e-mail address to be provided. And Usenet has
> been around for a relatively long time.
>
> Now, having said that, I also don't know of any client that suggests using
a
> bogus address. As a general rule (when using the Internet in any
fashion),
> is that you should keep a public e-mail account and a private e-mail
> account. The former is to be provided when signing up for services that
may
> or may not keep your address private. The latter is for distribution to
> trusted parties.
>
> In any case, Microsoft is doing nothing different than any other provider
of
> this type of service. Should there be a warning for lesser experienced
> users? Perhaps, and I'm very certain that they'll look into it. However,
I
> wouldn't say that anyone has a "problem," per se, because nothing out of
the
> ordinary is being done.
>
> > This is an MS issue and it needs to be sorted out and
> > smarmy little replies like that lose respect in MVP`s MS
> > and is generally helping whoever is sending these emails
> > make people hate MS even more.
> >
> > You have let yourself down MS and the users of this
> > knowledge by that posting.
>
> I read the previous thread, and I'm failing to see what the outrage is all
> about. I've seen some snide replies, and I've even posted some myself,
but
> that seemed like an innocent enough, brief reply. I don't know the
> individual who posted it, but I certainly don't see any ill intent.
>
> I'd also urge you to keep in mind the fact that all of the people who post
> answers here do so free of charge, and ask nothing in return. Some folks
> post 20, 30, or more messages per day, all aiming to contribute or help in
> some way. And those types of folks simply cannot write an entire detailed
> reply to each original post. Short answers are not meant to spite anyone,
> in most cases. Sometimes, as it appears to me in this case, the reply was
> simply stating the obvious. And while that doesn't resolve your issue, I
> wouldn't think it necessary to lambaste anyone for posting the message.
>
> Lastly, as far as making any type of generalization is concerned, I
wouldn't
> ever hold an entire group accountable for the actions of a single person
> (again, I'm not saying that the person in question is right or
wrong--that's
> obviously for each of us to decide for ourselves). I'm saying that just
as
> a fellow human being. It's just not nice.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Cheers
>
> Keith
>
>
- Next message: Phil Weldon: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- Previous message: Bill Sanderson: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- In reply to: Keith W. McCammon: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- Next in thread: Jason: "Re: azc reply to jasons post re posting email address's"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
