On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:22 AM, mark drillock <mdrillock@cox.net> wrote:

> The problem is that Andrew did not come here asking for help in resolving a
> problem. He came with strongly worded accusations that he later retracted.
> He did the same on the Samba. These now retracted statements can't be
> undone. He has dishonored himself and detracted from this list, IMHO. He has
> also damaged a man who he now says did not fully deserve it.
>
> The choice was not between pmail and nuclear war. The fact that nuclear war
> may have worked for Andrew does not justify it. There was a large middle
> ground that he could have traveled across first.
>
> Mark

Mark,

I did not condone Andrew's method. I simply meant it was appropriate to
discuss vendor issues here. As you can plainly see, the membership has no
hesitation in telling someone if they are right or wrong. Note that I
expressed my 'personal opinion' rather than stating moderator policy.

A couple of years ago, I had a problem with an uncooperative vendor. I
posted a simple query on the List that went something like this, "Has anyone
dealt with Company XYZ before?" 20 minutes later the unresponsive vendor
contacted me and the problem was solved.

In Andrew's case, the vendor was/is apparently not a reader on this List.
It  is my understanding that he attempted to contact with the vendor via
pmail. In fact, I even called the vendor on his behalf weeks ago but could
not get a live person to respond. Guess, Andrew lost his patience and did
what is now the cause of this discussion.  Andrew's method was wrong. He has
been chastised. Point(s) have/has been made. To some, bandwidth has been
squandered. Life goes on. If anyone else was/is thinking of doing what
Andrew has done, I'm sure they will have second thoughts about it now. In
the last situation, it may have been bandwidth well spent.

Cheers,

BenT