"BobW" <nimby_NEEDSPAM@roadrunner.com> wrote in message news:q9KdnYE_8uqU2r_VnZ2dnUVZ_hmtnZ2d@giganews.com...> > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in > message news:o1e424d2h2uldtu4qm4589v667lu96hip8@4ax.com... >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H >> <newsgroup@johnhandwork.com> wrote: >> >>>John Larkin wrote: >>>> >>>> To Lattice: >>>> >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent. >>>> >>>> >>>> To the group: >>>> >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please >>>> >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor >>>> >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords. >>>> >>>> John >>> >>>Was this really necessary? >>> >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand. >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't >>>that frequent. >>> >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal? >>> >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you. >>> >>>- John_H >> >> >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make >> sure it *doesn't* pay off. >> >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else. >> >> >> John >> > > For what it's worth, I agree with John. > > It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter > commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those. > Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion.Come on guys, get over it, really. The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so the OP did the right thing. It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened it. I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement to the correct groups with the correct formatting. Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design group with many FPGA designers afer all. Dave.
ANNC: FPGA Design Software Webcast
Started by ●May 7, 2008
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
On May 8, 8:35 am, "David L. Jones" <altz...@gmail.com> wrote:> "BobW" <nimby_NEEDS...@roadrunner.com> wrote in message > > news:q9KdnYE_8uqU2r_VnZ2dnUVZ_hmtnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > > > > "John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in > > messagenews:o1e424d2h2uldtu4qm4589v667lu96hip8@4ax.com... > >> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H > >> <newsgr...@johnhandwork.com> wrote: > > >>>John Larkin wrote: > > >>>> To Lattice: > > >>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that > >>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent. > > >>>> To the group: > > >>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please > > >>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor > > >>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with > >>>> lots of google-searchable keywords. > > >>>> John > > >>>Was this really necessary? > > >>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like > >>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand. > >>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from > >>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't > >>>that frequent. > > >>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't > >>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is > >>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal? > > >>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you. > > >>>- John_H > > >> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded > >> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who > >> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make > >> sure it *doesn't* pay off. > > >> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else. > > >> John > > > For what it's worth, I agree with John. > > > It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter > > commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those. > > Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion. > > Come on guys, get over it, really. > The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so the > OP did the right thing. > It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are > interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened it. > I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement to > the correct groups with the correct formatting. > Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design > group with many FPGA designers afer all. > > Dave.I have to agree with John L on this one. I don't think we should in any way encourage commercial posts here. The issue is quantity. If we are happy with one post, why not 100? There are a couple of groups I visit that have been virtually ruined by advertising. No, it is not on topic advertising, but I don't think that is the point. The quantity is the problem. I can see some groups getting hundreds or thousands of on topic posts a day if all vendors did this. Can you imagine how flooded comp.arch.embedded would be if every maker of MCUs, memory, I/O chips, etc. posted just one message a day? If you like these messages and want to receive them, why not get on the vendor's email list? I'm sure they will only be too happy to directly email you with all sorts of information. Isn't that what opt- in mail lists are for???
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
On May 7, 2:11 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:> On Wed, 7 May 2008 10:52:01 -0700 (PDT), bart > > <bart.boro...@latticesemi.com> wrote: > >Lattice is holding a webcast today, Wednesday, May 7th, on our latest > >version of our FPGA software design tools "ispLEVER 7.1 FPGA Design > >Tool Technical Rollout." The presenter will be Troy Scott, from our > >software marketing group. > > >If you're interested, the event takes place live at 11am Pacific, > >18:00 GMT. In addition, you will be able to view this webcast archive > >on-demand, at your convenience, starting a few hours after the live > >event takes place. > > >You can register by clicking: > >http://www.latticesemi.com/corporate/webcasts/isplever7.1fpgadesignto... > > >Bart Borosky, Lattice > > To Lattice: > > We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that > you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent. > > To the group: > > Whenever anybody spams us, please > > 1. Blackball them as a vendor > > 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with > lots of google-searchable keywords. > > JohnI didn't realize that this thread is cross posted to... five different groups. I guess we get to read it more than once as well. I can't exactly blackball Lattice. I just designed in one of their parts because it was almost the only part that would suit all of the requirements. Altera has their new zero power PLDs (it's about time guys) and Xilinx is still stuck in the 90's with their near total lack of Flash based FPGAs. (yeah, I know they have a dual die spartan flash chip, but they blew the packaging). So Lattice may not be perfect, (is anyone?) but I can't blacklist them because they posted to a newsgroup I read. Rick
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
CBFalconer wrote:> John Larkin wrote: > >>bart <bart.borosky@latticesemi.com> wrote: >> >> >>>Lattice is holding a webcast today, Wednesday, May 7th, on our >>>latest version of our FPGA software design tools "ispLEVER 7.1 >>>FPGA Design Tool Technical Rollout." The presenter will be Troy >>>Scott, from our software marketing group. >>> >>>If you're interested, the event takes place live at 11am Pacific, >>>18:00 GMT. In addition, you will be able to view this webcast >>>archive on-demand, at your convenience, starting a few hours >>>after the live event takes place. >>> >>>You can register by clicking: >>> http://www.latticesemi.com/corporate/webcasts/isplever7.1fpgadesigntool.cfm >> >>We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. >>Now that you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent. > > > You're wrong. Proper announcements are quite topical. The quality > may be questionable, and that is also suitable for discussion. Of > course, making the announcement less than one hour before the event > begins is indicative of poor thinking. Even 24 hours notice would > be cutting it close. >It's a question of opinion, not of fact, so it's not a matter of right or wrong. Your observation "Proper announcements are quite topical." supports the "it is not spam" point of view. As you point out, Lattice (or at least its representative Mr. Borosky) has not given a lot of thought to getting the notice out in a "proper" manner. By "proper", I mean where and when it would do Lattice the most good. That supports the "it is spam" point of view. For the record, I agree with JL. Posted here as it was it is spam, in my opinion. Ed
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4822f3a7$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...> > "BobW" <nimby_NEEDSPAM@roadrunner.com> wrote in message > news:q9KdnYE_8uqU2r_VnZ2dnUVZ_hmtnZ2d@giganews.com... >> >> "John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in >> message news:o1e424d2h2uldtu4qm4589v667lu96hip8@4ax.com... >>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H >>> <newsgroup@johnhandwork.com> wrote: >>> >>>>John Larkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> To Lattice: >>>>> >>>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that >>>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To the group: >>>>> >>>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please >>>>> >>>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor >>>>> >>>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with >>>>> lots of google-searchable keywords. >>>>> >>>>> John >>>> >>>>Was this really necessary? >>>> >>>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like >>>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand. >>>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from >>>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't >>>>that frequent. >>>> >>>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't >>>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is >>>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal? >>>> >>>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you. >>>> >>>>- John_H >>> >>> >>> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded >>> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who >>> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make >>> sure it *doesn't* pay off. >>> >>> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else. >>> >>> >>> John >>> >> >> For what it's worth, I agree with John. >> >> It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter >> commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those. >> Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion. > > Come on guys, get over it, really. > The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so > the OP did the right thing. > It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are > interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened > it. > I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement > to the correct groups with the correct formatting. > Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design > group with many FPGA designers afer all. > > Dave.The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. Are the people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the one who say don't?
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:53:36 -0500, "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote:> >"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message >news:4822f3a7$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au... >> >> "BobW" <nimby_NEEDSPAM@roadrunner.com> wrote in message >> news:q9KdnYE_8uqU2r_VnZ2dnUVZ_hmtnZ2d@giganews.com... >>> >>> "John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in >>> message news:o1e424d2h2uldtu4qm4589v667lu96hip8@4ax.com... >>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:19:40 -0700 (PDT), John_H >>>> <newsgroup@johnhandwork.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>John Larkin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> To Lattice: >>>>>> >>>>>> We dumped Lattice over buggy compilers and dinky performance. Now that >>>>>> you're spamming our group, I'll make the ban permanent. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> To the group: >>>>>> >>>>>> Whenever anybody spams us, please >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Blackball them as a vendor >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. Say bad things about their companies and products, preferably with >>>>>> lots of google-searchable keywords. >>>>>> >>>>>> John >>>>> >>>>>Was this really necessary? >>>>> >>>>>If there were technical webcasts from any of the big vendors, I'd like >>>>>to know about them though preferably more than 8 minutes beforehand. >>>>>If the posts of this nature got to be more than a couple a month from >>>>>any one source I'd agree with the spam catagorization but it isn't >>>>>that frequent. >>>>> >>>>>I'm disappointed that you had problems with them in the past and won't >>>>>trust them for future designs because of your history; competition is >>>>>almost always good. But is it reason to be publicly vocal? >>>>> >>>>>Kill-lists are easy to manage if bart's messages offend you. >>>>> >>>>>- John_H >>>> >>>> >>>> If we don't discourage commercial posts, newsgroups will be flooded >>>> with them. I can't kill-file the tens of thousands of companies who >>>> would spam newsgroups if they thought it would pay off. So let's make >>>> sure it *doesn't* pay off. >>>> >>>> If they want to advertise, let them pay for it somewhere else. >>>> >>>> >>>> John >>>> >>> >>> For what it's worth, I agree with John. >>> >>> It's a real shame that we, now, have to go out of our way to filter >>> commercial and sexual posts. There are proper places for both of those. >>> Usenet is not one of them, in my opinion. >> >> Come on guys, get over it, really. >> The heading clearly had "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so >> the OP did the right thing. >> It only takes a split second to scan the header to see if you are >> interested. If you aren't interested then you shouldn't have even opened >> it. >> I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off announcement >> to the correct groups with the correct formatting. >> Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional design >> group with many FPGA designers afer all. >> >> Dave. >The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. Are the >people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the one who say don't? >OK, now imagine every seminar, every call for papers, every new product announcement, every investors conference call, and every new goofy marketing idea being crossposted to five newsgroups, alongside the offers for replica watches, sneakers, and discount drugs and porn. We need to discourage commercial posts. John
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
Robert Miles wrote:> "David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message >... snip ...> >> Come on guys, get over it, really. The heading clearly had >> "ANNC:" and what it was about clearly stated, so the OP did the >> right thing. It only takes a split second to scan the header to >> see if you are interested. If you aren't interested then you >> shouldn't have even opened it. >> >> I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off >> announcement to the correct groups with the correct formatting. >> >> Some people might very well be interested, this is a professional >> design group with many FPGA designers afer all. > > The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. Are > the people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the one who > say don't?I accepted it, and I am posting in comp.arch.embedded. Please snip your quotes. -- [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
John Larkin wrote:> "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote: >> "David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message >>... snip ...>> >>> I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off >>> announcement to the correct groups with the correct formatting. >>> Some people might very well be interested, this is a >>> professional design group with many FPGA designers afer all. >> >> The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. >> Are the people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the >> one who say don't? > > OK, now imagine every seminar, every call for papers, every new > product announcement, every investors conference call, and every > new goofy marketing idea being crossposted to five newsgroups, > alongside the offers for replica watches, sneakers, and discount > drugs and porn. > > We need to discourage commercial posts.But this was not a commercial post. It was an announcement of something of possible interest to all participants on those newsgroups. It should have had a follow-up setting also. Please snip the quotes on your replies. -- [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
Robert Miles wrote:> > The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. Are the > people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the one who say don't?I'd agree that spanning 5 groups was on the lower end of the IQ scale. The most relevent group would be comp.arch.fpga -jg
Reply by ●May 8, 20082008-05-08
On Thu, 08 May 2008 13:29:29 -0400, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:>John Larkin wrote: >> "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote: >>> "David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> >... snip ... >>> >>>> I'd consider this ON TOPIC and not spam as it was a one-off >>>> announcement to the correct groups with the correct formatting. >>>> Some people might very well be interested, this is a >>>> professional design group with many FPGA designers afer all. >>> >>> The message was crossposted to five newsgroups, not just one. >>> Are the people who say accept it in the same newsgroup as the >>> one who say don't? >> >> OK, now imagine every seminar, every call for papers, every new >> product announcement, every investors conference call, and every >> new goofy marketing idea being crossposted to five newsgroups, >> alongside the offers for replica watches, sneakers, and discount >> drugs and porn. >> >> We need to discourage commercial posts. > >But this was not a commercial post. It was an announcement of >something of possible interest to all participants on those >newsgroups.Well, since we all wear shoes, and most of us like sex, all the sneaker and porn ads are of possible interest to us.> >Please snip the quotes on your replies.Feel free to snip whatever you like. John
