[HPCC-Conf] Conference Report
Richard Nelson
hpcc-conf@lists.handheld.org
Thu Oct 3 18:17:01 2002
--=====================_42213740==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Hello,
A few clarifications -rjn.
At 10/3/200210:56 PM+0100, you wrote:
> > The situation this year was exceptional. HP was gone for over two years.
>
>This is not a valid reason, IMHO, particularly not at an HPCC conference
>(which this claimed to be, even though I somewhat doubt it was!).
You have made these comments several times. I am not sure what you
mean by them. I assisted Wlodek with the Conference to help him.
Let me say this again - to help him. He was in charge at all times and
he knew what was going on at all times. You clearly don't know what
goes into a Conference like the one that just happened. You don't
know the work, who did what, etc. When you have the complete picture,
perhaps after your meeting that I have heard is scheduled, you will better
understand things. As I have said - don't just tell us, show us. Do the
work, then complain, then your comments will be more respected.
> > The "new" team was meeting the "Community" for the first time. We
> > had no idea what to expect just they had no idea what to expect. I think
>
>That's not my complaint. My comment is that it should have been made
>clear from the start
The start of what? Do you think that there is a time when you know
exactly what and when is going to happen at the conference?
You don't understand how dynamic these things are. You are too
rigid in your expectations. Will you be the one to stand up and say -
WAIT, I just noticed that the slide said something we don't agree
with - and then get everyones agreement as what to do next? Three
people fly thousands of miles because they were invited and you
will do that? Life is not so ideal in the real world.
>that the conference details would be published
>as/when the organisers saw fit. And that we should not accept
>presentations
You make making assumptions that are not valid. We had now
idea who was coming or exactly what they would say. I will bet
that they were not sure either until they sized up the group. You
keep assuming an ideal world, it is not. I agree with you in principle
and some day you may be the one making the decisions - Good luck.
>that had any form of 'secrecy' attached to them. If HP
>didn't want to tell us about their future plans, or if they didn't want
>to come at all, I am not sure we'd have been any worse off.
>
> > that they were surprised and impressed. As it turned out, no one knew
> > what they were going to say until they said it. Even the people who
> > attended were not the ones who were going to attend originally. I agree
> > that it is uncomfortable to be put in such a position, but sometimes
> > things just happen beyond anyones control.
>
>As a point for future conferences, I guess we should make clear under
>just what terms we'd accept a presentation (apart from the above, I would
>think the origanisers should get an abstract in advance
In an ideal world this would be expected. Time is always a problem.
We all have too little of it.
>so they have some idea as to what will be talked about).
>
>[...]
>
> > > > Do you like having HP attend meetings and Conferences?
> > >
> > >As I've said before, I want HPCC to remain indepedant of HP. If HP wish
> > >to attend our meetings then it has to be on _our_ terms. If they don't
> > >like said terms, then they should stay away.
> >
> > That balance of independence and sharing mutual interests is a difficult
> > one that each group has to work out on an incident by incident basis. This
> > "balance" between our interests and HP's interests is a vital part of who
>
>I really don't see why? You will eventually, given more time.
>
> > we are. As I have said, I don't believe that a totally independent
> group is
> > healthy or a good idea when you look at the special situation of
> Calculators.
>
>Why not? Back when HP were actaully designing and making their own
>calculators, it was possible that they would release various NOMAS
>information to user groups. Now that they're not actually doing much (if
>any) of the design, I think that's unlikely.
NOMAS is a user group concept designed by me, negotiated by me, and
only possible because we were part of the "HP family". You can be sure
of one thing. The kind of information that we obtained in the past would
not have been available if the group was independent of HP. We
accomplished the impossible in some cases. I told one story about the
use of PPC EPROMS. I am sorry, what you suggest is contrary to what
has worked very well for 28 years. Of course things have changed,
but still there are reasons to consider HP's needs. We all want the same
thing - the best possible machines.
>I have to ask 'what can HP really do for user groups now'? I think 'very
>little.
Will you donate five HP49's to the next conference? Check with Wlodek
on what was gained by HPCC.
>[...]
>
> > >And FWIW, I would be totally against delaying an issue of DataFile
> > >because of this. Sure we can't publish this information before HP allow
> > >us to, but that just means it goes in the next issue. DataFile is not an
> > >HP publicity flyer.
> >
> > Absolutely, but I also believe the DAtafile should serve its readers by
> > providing accurate and timely information. That is the struggle of the
>
>Acrurate, yes. But we should not delay an issue just to suit HP's ideas.
You miss the point completely. Again you are so rigid in your thinking.
HP doesn't care when you publish, they just want it to be appropriate in
its timing. It is getting the information to the members that counts.
The policy is up to the board as they guide the editor. Would you like
timely information or "old" information. Why publish news type
information at all? Ooops, of course, you want only schematics, etc.
Fine, but there has to be a balance.
>We publish their information in the first issue after they release it.
And if you know that news can be released two days after the normal
publishing date? In this case the news will be two months old. If
you ARE NOT in dependant HP may work with you. I think you
should be the editor for a while so you will gain a perspective on what
can and cannot be done. Again, work first, then complain.
>I don't think DataFile was ever delayed for the release of a new model
>calculator, let alone some possibly incorrect marketing information. And
>that's the way it should be.
I don't have any idea about the schedule, except what Bruce has
said recently. There are a lot of people involved and it will take
a bit of work to address this exceptional situation that you want to
force into a fixed attitude. The willow stands, the oak falls.
> > editor. If it were easy anyone could do the job. I don't know the
>
>The main problem with being editor IMHO is actually convincing people to
>write articles....
Yes, that is the biggest challenge, but also there are objectives to be met.
Each issue follows a "formula" weather the editor writes it down or not.
In my case I wrote it down and went after material to meet the guidelines
for each issue. I always has three times as much material than I ever could
publish.
>-tony
X < > Y, Richard
--=====================_42213740==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>Hello,<br><br>
A few clarifications -rjn.<br><br>
</b></font>At 10/3/200210:56 PM+0100, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>> The situation this year was
exceptional. HP was gone for over two years.<br><br>
This is not a valid reason, IMHO, particularly not at an HPCC conference
<br>
(which this claimed to be, even though I somewhat doubt it
was!).</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>You have made these comments several
times. I am not sure what you<br>
mean by them. I assisted Wlodek with the Conference to help
him. <br>
Let me say this again - to help him. He was in charge at all times
and <br>
he knew what was going on at all times. You clearly don't know what
<br>
goes into a Conference like the one that just happened. You don't
<br>
know the work, who did what, etc. When you have the complete
picture, <br>
perhaps after your meeting that I have heard is scheduled, you will
better<br>
understand things. As I have said - don't just tell us, show
us. </font><font color="#FF0000">Do the<br>
work</font><font color="#0000FF">, then complain, then your comments will
be more respected.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>> The "new"
team was meeting the "Community" for the first time.
We<br>
> had no idea what to expect just they had no idea what to
expect. I think<br><br>
That's not my complaint. My comment is that it should have been made
<br>
clear from the start </blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>The start of what? Do you think that there
is a time when you know<br>
exactly what and when is going to happen at the conference? <br>
You don't understand how dynamic these things are. You are too
<br>
rigid in your expectations. Will you be the one to stand up and say
- <br>
WAIT, I just noticed that the slide said something we don't agree <br>
with - and then get everyones agreement as what to do next? Three
<br>
people fly thousands of miles because they were invited and you <br>
will do that? Life is not so ideal in the real world.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>that the conference
details would be published <br>
as/when the organisers saw fit. And that we should not accept
<br>
presentations </blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>You make making assumptions that are not
valid. We had now<br>
idea who was coming or exactly what they would say. I will bet
<br>
that they were not sure either until they sized up the group.
You<br>
keep assuming an ideal world, it is not. I agree with you in
principle<br>
and some day you may be the one making the decisions - Good
luck.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>that had any form of
'secrecy' attached to them. If HP <br>
didn't want to tell us about their future plans, or if they didn't want
<br>
to come at all, I am not sure we'd have been any worse off.<br><br>
> that they were surprised and impressed. As it turned out, no
one knew<br>
> what they were going to say until they said it. Even the
people who<br>
> attended were not the ones who were going to attend
originally. I agree<br>
> that it is uncomfortable to be put in such a position, but
sometimes<br>
> things just happen beyond anyones control.<br><br>
As a point for future conferences, I guess we should make clear under
<br>
just what terms we'd accept a presentation (apart from the above, I would
<br>
think the origanisers should get an abstract in advance
</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>In an ideal world this would be expected.
Time is always a problem.<br>
We all have too little of it.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>so they have some idea
as to what will be talked about). <br><br>
[...]<br><br>
> > > Do you like having HP attend meetings and
Conferences?<br>
> ><br>
> >As I've said before, I want HPCC to remain indepedant of HP. If
HP wish<br>
> >to attend our meetings then it has to be on _our_ terms. If they
don't<br>
> >like said terms, then they should stay away.<br>
> <br>
> That balance of independence and sharing mutual interests is a
difficult<br>
> one that each group has to work out on an incident by incident
basis. This<br>
> "balance" between our interests and HP's interests is a
vital part of who<br><br>
I really don't see why? <font color="#0000FF"><b>You will
eventually, given more time.</b></font><br><br>
> we are. As I have said, I don't believe that a totally
independent group is<br>
> healthy or a good idea when you look at the special situation of
Calculators.<br><br>
Why not? Back when HP were actaully designing and making their own <br>
calculators, it was possible that they would release various NOMAS <br>
information to user groups. Now that they're not actually doing much (if
<br>
any) of the design, I think that's unlikely.</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>NOMAS is a user group concept designed by me,
negotiated by me, and<br>
only possible because we were part of the "HP family".
You can be sure<br>
of one thing. The kind of information that we obtained in the past
would<br>
not have been available if the group was independent of HP. We
<br>
accomplished the impossible in some cases. I told one story about
the <br>
use of PPC EPROMS. I am sorry, what you suggest is contrary to what
<br>
has worked very well for 28 years. Of course things have
changed,<br>
but still there are reasons to consider HP's needs. We all want the
same<br>
thing - the best possible machines.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>I have to ask 'what can
HP really do for user groups now'? I think 'very <br>
little. </blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>Will you donate five HP49's to the next
conference? Check with Wlodek<br>
on what was gained by HPCC.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>[...]<br><br>
> >And FWIW, I would be totally against delaying an issue of
DataFile<br>
> >because of this. Sure we can't publish this information before
HP allow<br>
> >us to, but that just means it goes in the next issue. DataFile
is not an<br>
> >HP publicity flyer.<br>
> <br>
> Absolutely, but I also believe the DAtafile should serve its readers
by<br>
> providing accurate and timely information. That is the
struggle of the<br><br>
Acrurate, yes. But we should not delay an issue just to suit HP's
ideas.</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>You miss the point completely. Again you
are so rigid in your thinking.<br>
HP doesn't care when you publish, they just want it to be appropriate
in<br>
its timing. It is getting the information to the members that
counts.<br>
The policy is up to the board as they guide the editor. Would you
like<br>
timely information or "old" information. Why publish news
type <br>
information at all? Ooops, of course, you want only schematics,
etc. <br>
Fine, but there has to be a balance.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>We publish their
information in the first issue after they release it.</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>And if you know that news can be released two
days after the normal<br>
publishing date? In this case the news will be two months
old. If <br>
you ARE NOT in dependant HP may work with you. I think you<br>
should be the editor for a while so you will gain a perspective on
what<br>
can and cannot be done. Again, work first, then complain.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>I don't think DataFile
was ever delayed for the release of a new model <br>
calculator, let alone some possibly incorrect marketing information. And
<br>
that's the way it should be.</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>I don't have any idea about the schedule, except
what Bruce has <br>
said recently. There are a lot of people involved and it will
take<br>
a bit of work to address this exceptional situation that you want
to<br>
force into a fixed attitude. The willow stands, the oak
falls.<br><br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>> editor. If it
were easy anyone could do the job. I don't know the<br><br>
The main problem with being editor IMHO is actually convincing people to
<br>
write articles....</blockquote><br>
<font color="#0000FF"><b>Yes, that is the biggest challenge, but also
there are objectives to be met.<br>
Each issue follows a "formula" weather the editor writes it
down or not.<br>
In my case I wrote it down and went after material to meet the
guidelines<br>
for each issue. I always has three times as much material than I
ever could<br>
publish.<br><br>
<br>
</b></font><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>-tony<br>
</blockquote><font size=5 color="#0000FF"><b>X < >
Y, Richard</font></b></html>
--=====================_42213740==_.ALT--