Re: CGIDEV2 - Nice to see vendors hopping all over this..

[Tom Jedrzejewicz <tomjedrz@xxxxxxxxx>]

My responses to Brads responses to my responses (ad nauseum) ...

> >  I suggest
> > that it was carelessly worded rather than intentionally
> > deceptive.
> 
> Please....  marketing is built on deception.  Not
> carelessness.

I choose to think well of people until I experience otherwise.  My
experience with the folks you are trashing has been eagerness and
enthusiasm, not slipperiness. (Note - I am not a customer of theirs,
either)

> > It was essentially "negative" in nature .. we were asked to express
> > our concern and disappointment.  And, (as an aside) it appears to be
> > working.
> 
> What appears to be working?  IBM most likely won't budge
> from their stance on it.. but I hope they do.

I got the impression that CGIDEV2 had no home until the commotion
started, at which point the CTC was nominated.  It may be less that we
desire, but it is progress.

> >
> > I may be wrong, but didn't you sell something related to
> > CGIDEV2 yourself?
> 
> I still do.  But what does that have anything to do with
> this?  I don't recall mentioning it in the OP either.  I
> easily could have (happens a lot from others).

At the very least, in the interest of full disclosure, you should have
disclosed that you are a vendor in this space when you were taking
another vendor to task.