Mailing List Drama: I'm a Net Nazi

Consider this scenario: One of your neighbors wants to build a deck. He’d like some assistance, so he decides to ask the community if anyone is willing to help. He climbs atop the roof of his house with a bullhorn and announces: “I am building a deck and would appreciate some assistance. If you are willing to help, please let me know. Thank you.”

Shortly thereafter, another of your neighbors replies through his bullhorn: “I built a deck not long ago. I’d be happy to help you with your plans.” A third neighbor replies (also via bullhorn), “I have some tools I can lend you. What do you need?”

This exchange continues over several days among various neighbors. Finally, you ask politely if they’d consider taking the conversation to a less public venue. Your deck-building neighbor becomes angry and uses his bullhorn to publicly object to your “incredibly stupid” request. He calls you a “Nazi” for trying to “control” his ability to communicate, and suggests that if you don’t want to hear it, you can simply wear earplugs.

Sound ridiculous? I experienced something similar this week on a private mailing list to which I subscribe. The list is hosted by a product group within a large corporation for the purpose of sharing future plans with and soliciting feedback from advanced users of the product. A member of the list asked if anyone would be willing to help him localize a free utility for which he is responsible. A few members responded, and over the course of several days they exchanged nearly two dozen messages on the list.

Eventually, one of the members (not me!) asked if they’d consider taking the conversation off-list. The original poster replied at length, explaining that this exchange had about run its course, but he didn’t think there was anything wrong with using the list for this purpose. At that point, desiring to express my support for the member who had objected and to discourage this type of activity in the future, I posted the following:

From: Phil Weber
Date: Apr 4, 2006 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: Want to show off your bi-lingual skills ?

I can't speak for Matt, but I have no problem with your posting a request for help to this list. But once someone decides to volunteer, they could (and should, in my opinion) take it offline and communicate with you directly. Thanks!
--
Phil

That’s when the original poster got angry, calling me a “Net Nanny Nazi” and my suggestion “incredibly stupid” on his weblog.

Personally, before posting to a mailing list, I ask myself:

1. Is this message appropriate, considering the topic and purpose of the list?
2. Will the majority of the list’s members find this information useful?

If the answer to either question is ‘no,’ then I don’t post it. Does that make me a Nazi? You be the judge.

  6 Apr 06 1:46 PM · Comments (12) · Tags: Rants

Cingular Sucks

From: Phil Weber
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 8:15 PM
To: sales@cingular.com
Subject: Please take my money!

I am a former AT&T Wireless customer. I am satisfied with my current phone and calling plan. I would like to add a Laptop Connect Unlimited line for $59.99/month and purchase a Sierra Wireless Aircard 860 PC Card modem. Cingular's Web site allows me to order them, but when I get to the checkout page and enter my payment information, I am told to “double-check my address and try again” (see attached screenshots; the address is correct).

I went into my local Cingular Wireless store today and attempted to order them in person, and was told that because I am a former AT&T Wireless customer, I do not qualify for the $59.99/month price. In order to qualify, I must switch to a Cingular plan, which would be fine except that in order to do so, I must also purchase a new phone!

This is unacceptable. I am an existing customer who WANTS to pay you an additional $60/month, and Cingular won't let me. I would prefer to keep my existing phone and calling plan, but if I have to purchase a new phone in order to obtain wireless broadband access, I'll do so with Verizon.

Can you help me?

Thank you,
Phil Weber

Update: Apparently, I’m not the first customer to experience this frustration.

  6 Feb 06 11:56 PM · Comments (3) · Tags: Rants, Tech

Department of Redundancy Department

I first learned of the release of Visual Studio 2005 Beta 1, as well as Express Editions and the MSDN Feedback Center, shortly after midnight this morning. Since then, I've seen it reported by dozens of bloggers, and the day is young. ('We blog more by 8 a.m. than most people do all day.') If you're a .NET blogger and you haven't yet written about today's new releases, please don't!

What is the thought process that leads one to blog about an event of this magnitude? 'If I don't blog this, nobody will hear about it!' Or perhaps, 'Ooh, if I hurry and blog this, I'll be the first, and I'll get lots of links and notoriety!' Please.

Before you post (not just today, every day), I urge you to peruse the home page at weblogs.asp.net or do a search at Technorati. If you don't have anything to say that hasn't already been said several times, do us all a favor and step away from the keyboard. Thank you.

 29 Jun 04 8:31 AM · Comments (7) · Tags: .NET, Blog, Rants

Crisis? What Crisis?

In a comment, Kent asks:

Doesn't it bother you that MS doesn't see the current state of VB.Net as a problem?

No, Kent, it doesn't bother me, because I don't see the current state of VB.NET as a problem, at least not a major one. Here's why:

Microsoft has always positioned VB as a RAD tool. By definition, RAD applications are meant to be developed rapidly. So while I agree that it would be nice if VB6 code could port effortlessly to VB.NET, I don't think the fact that it doesn't will present a huge problem to the vast majority of VB users: Most VB apps were written in a few days or weeks, and/or were written to solve very specific problems. Many of these apps can be maintained in VB6 for the remainder of their useful lives. If they do need to be rewritten, doing so will not require a great deal of effort -- they were developed rapidly to begin with, remember?

Most of the angst I see regarding the lack of compatibility between "Classic" VB and VB.NET comes from people who have used VB not as a RAD tool, but rather to develop large, complex applications. They have made a large investment in VB code, and expected to be able to collect dividends on that investment for many years. If I were in their position, I'd probably feel similarly frustrated. But I don't think their frustration equates to a major problem for the "state of VB": Their situation is an exception, rather than the rule.

 25 Aug 03 5:44 PM · Comments (3) · Tags: Rants, VB

I have a dream...

Julia Lerman laments the VB.NET stigma and C# elitism being perpetuated by the trade press. In particular, she refers to this editorial in asp.netPRO magazine. I found that editorial troubling as well. In it, Elden Nelson writes:

Whether it's just or not, C# developers make more money, get work more easily, and enjoy more prestige than VB developers.

He then recommends that VB.NET developers learn C# at their earliest opportunity, presumably to cash in on the cachet.

Now, I don't disagree that it's a good idea for VB developers to learn C#. But I do object to asp.netPRO's tacit endorsement of language bigotry. What if the editorial had said:

Whether it's just or not, white developers make more money, get work more easily, and enjoy more prestige than minority developers

(Or, as one of the commenters on Julia's blog suggests, "...male developers make more money, etc. than female developers")? If the situation is 'not just,' as Nelson implies, why isn't he working to change it?

 15 Aug 03 9:22 AM · Comments (1) · Tags: .NET, Rants, VB