Re: 9i New Features E-book

"hrishy" <hrishys_at_yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:4ef2a838.0406051819.396a9c00_at_posting.google.com...
> Hi Howard
>
> I eagerly lookforward to your notes on the 9i stuff and almost anythin
> u write for that matter most of my friends and me used your book on
> the 9i new features to clear our Oracle Certification Exams they are
> quite valauble to us.Beleive me better then most books i have ever
> come across I would be eagerly looking forward towards your 10G stuff
> new features guide who knows we might be tempted to write the 10g
> upgrade too..
>
> Ahh yes i think howard you are allowed to spam :-D (i will take care
> of the bad guys who dont allow you here is there any by the way )

Are there any bad guys?

Oh hoh! I can think of one or two. Usually, they threaten to sue if I name them, so I won't, but DB and MA and RN might be their initials. Perhaps, but I couldn't possibly comment.

Bad, not because they are morally bad people, or even because they are even unpleasant people. I wouldn't know, because I don't know them socially. Indeed, I'm almost certain they are perfectly decent people when it comes to buying the daily milk or loving their family. But definitely bad in the sense of "If you criticise my technical knowledge, I will threaten to resort to the law courts, rather than have an open debate with you". That is a stifling of intellectual debate akin to the book-burning of 1930s Germany, and is "bad", big time.

Even worse is the tactic, employed by one, which runs like this "If you criticise my technical knowledge, I will contact *your employers* and threaten *them* with a law suit. See how long you remain employed after that". Fortunately, every employer I've heard of subjected to that kind of approach says "Get lost, you obvious weirdo". But that the approach is made in the first place indicates "badness" of the first order.

Have a look at the recent index clustering factor thread in this very newsgroup. See if you can spot one post where a certain Mike Ault ever actually answered me (or Richard Foote... I'm not particularly special in this respect) directly. You will find that he found the most unlikely insertion points into the thread for his responses. Almost as if he were whistling in the wind, oblivious to the circumstances in which he found himself, and hoping they (me, Richard) would go away. When someone refuses to debate with another who says they're technically incorrect, you know you've found a bad'un -in the sense of, 'one who doesn't like to be challenged or who thinks it beneath them to justify their opinions'. Especially to smart-alecs who can prove a point with inconvenient facts.

Oracle knowledge is (or should be) a science, not a religious faith, nor a leap into the unknown. Yet there are "leading experts" in the Oracle community that would prefer an auto-da-fé (especially involving lawyers) to engaging in scientific discourse. And in the Oracle Hall of Infamy, it is those who will have a place of dishonour, or so I sincerely hope. Quite why these Oracle Pharisees should have such a devoted following, I have never quite worked out, except in terms of herd-theory. I can only hope people begin to realise that there really *are* good and bad ones in the Oracle knowledge community, and become more discriminating accordingly.

All of which is true, but a bit heavy as a response to you: so, changing mood very rapidly, thank you for your kind words, and I hope you and your friends can bear with me until the 10g stuff is ready for publishing. It makes me happy to think that you might have got 9i OCP partly as a result of reading the first version of the 9i New Features document. I think the new version is better, because there are lots more practical examples for people to test and experiment with and learn for themselves, so if that makes more happy readers, I'm even more pleased. Someone's already emailed me, saying "You're a bit late, aren't you?". To which I can only say, "I'd rather be late with insight than early to market with thoughtlessness"

Best regards,
HJR Received on Sat Jun 05 2004 - 23:11:27 CDT