On Wed, 19 Jun 1996 18:27:54 -0400 Craig A Summerhill said:
>On Wed, 19 Jun 1996, LISTSERV Administrator <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Jun 1996 11:38:40 -0400 Gregory Decker said:
>> >
>> > So it is OK to take cheap shots at listproc? That is what I was
>> > objecting too. Listproc serves a purpose with thousands of satisfied
>> > users.
>>
>> Considering that this is a mailing list for *LISTSERV*, yeah... I think
>> it's okay to take cheap shots at listproc here, personally.  I'm sure
>> if there's a listproc mailing list somewhere that the folks there take
>> the occasional cheap shot at LISTSERV.  Get over it or get off this list.
>
>Speaking personally as one who has been subscribed to the support lists
>for *both* products for five or so years, you're wrong.  That is all
>there is to it.
 
Okay... so I'm wrong.  Big deal.  This list is still for LISTSERV, not
LISTPROC.
 
> The criticisms and accusations almost entirely fly
>unidirectionally, from the LISTSERV community toward the LISTPROC
>community (and LISTPROC developers).
 
Okay, so?
 
> Furthermore, in my experience,
>they almost universally come from people who are ignorant of what they
>are criticizing.  You can decide if that's you or not.
 
Well, considering I haven't criticized any part of Listproc, I guess that's
not me.
 
>I never saw LISTPROC system admins or list managers taking the kind of
>cheap shots at the LISTSERV product that people on this list routinely
>take at LISTPROC and with seeming enjoyment I might add.
 
Maybe there's just nothing they can find to take pot shots at... (which is
funny, because *I* can find shots to take at LISTSERV...)
 
> What bothers
>me is the large number of subscribers to this list that silently tolerate
>it.
 
What bothers me is that there are people who actually think *any* of this
is worth further discussion.  This is a discussion list for and about
LISTSERV... if you were on a discussion list for, oh, say, the Chicago
Bulls, would you expect there would be absolutely no pot shots taken
at the Seattle Sonics?
 
The point is... WHO CARES IF SOMEONE TAKES POT SHOTS AT LISTPROC ON A
LISTSERV LIST and WHO CARES IF SOMEONE DOES TAKE POT SHOTS AT LISTSERV
A LISTPROC LIST?????  (Well, obviously *you* do, but some of us don't
have that thin a skin.)
 
> And Eric, while you don't take those kind of shots at LISTPROC
>yourself (at least not publicly), you certainly do nothing to discourage
>them do you?
 
Actually, it's probably best that he stay out of it just like he's doing.
Why should he bother to discourage them?  It's not his job to play
God on this list.  He may be the owner, but he's not the moderator, and,
though I'm not positive, I don't even think Eric was the one who started
this list.  Wasn't it one of the ones that John Harlan started lo these
many years ago?
 
>The reality is, our budget didn't permit us to
>build the computing environment that was required to support LISTSERV at
>that time.
 
So?
 
>The LISTPROC product was under development at that time, and we went
>with the only product available that would meet our needs.
 
So?
 
> When L-Soft
>did announce a unix product, and then quickly stepped up the production
>cycle on it to compete with the CREN ListProcessor, I considered the
>relative merits of both products and considered licensing the L-Soft
>one.  But the reality is, for the price, the ListProcessor is a better
>product for my company.  The cost/benefit analysis for LISTSERV vs.
>LISTPROC isn't even close.  I *have* looked at it.
 
So?
 
I'm really happy it meets your needs, but that doesn't mean it meets
everyone's needs and it *still* doesn't matter because *this* is
is a discussion group for LISTSERV.  Start a list for discussing
the comparisons if that's what you want to talk about.
 
>I don't know why it is so hard for the LISTSERV community to accept that
>there is room in the marketplace for more than one product
 
Hey, more than one product?  Fine.  I'm all for it.  I know there are
lots of places who can't run or can't afford or whatever LISTSERV...
I'm one of the folks around here who fights tooth and nail from having
our management declare any given product as the "one and only"...
But for someone else to come into a discussion that is *clearly* stated
to be around Product A, and someone (whether in a humourous fashion or
as a statement of fact) says something negative about another product
in relation to the one on which the discussion is based, the person
coming into the discussion can get over it or leave the discussion.
The choice is theirs.
 
If you don't think so, try going into a KKK meeting and announcing that
you're in favor of interracial relationships.  (An extreme analogy, I
realize, but nothing else seems to have gotten through so far.)
 
>(although
>I have a few ideas about that, too).
 
Oooo... I'm sure you do.  Too bad we don't care what your ideas on this
are.  Baiting like that is silly and completely pointless.
 
>LISTPROC has come a long way since
>the freeware release I first started using (5.41).  Is it perfect?  No,
>but I charge you to find *any* piece of software which is perfect.  It
>does perform consistently well, and I've found the developers to be quite
>responsive to my comments regarding product enhancement and improvement.
 
Lovely... fine.  Go tell them.  WE DON'T CARE.  WE USE LISTSERV.
 
>Long ago, I would have been willing to build those same bridges with
>Eric and later with L-Soft when it was formed.  Today, I've got too many
>other things on my agenda to worry about replacing a product that works
>well for the right price, and I've really lost the operational experience
>that would be required to make meaningful comments about unix performance
>on an L-Soft product.
>
>So why do I stay on this list?  I stay on this list because there are
>some larger protocol, interface, and standards issues which affect both
>development communities, as well as all the Coalition members, and I'm
>interested in seeing what other intelligent people have to say about
>those things.
 
Okay... that's fine...
 
>But I could sure do without the ego-driven LISTSERV vs. LISTPROC garbage.
 
And I could sure do without the folks who complain about people making
"evil" comments about LISTPROC on a LISTSERV list.  Here's a hint...
IGNORE THEM... if you see someone saying something about a LISTPROC
functionality in comparison to a LISTSERV functionality, simply and
quietly correct the person... don't whine about "pot shots".
 
Are we quite finished with this topic yet?  Sheesh.