Re[2]: Clarification of BPCS-L guidelines -- BPCS-L

     
     Genyphyr
     
     First of all, get a life!!!  d;^) Thanks for taking the time to post 
     your thoughts.  Here's what I suggest to be a "happy medium" that 
     everyone might agree on:
     
     If someone posts a problem/question (Peter in this case), then others 
     post a response/solution (you, Rindi), that should be the extent of 
     the "public" exchange on BPCS-L in my view.  All persons with 
     follow-up questions (including "lurkers") for those with solutions can 
     ask them "privately" (off BPCS-L).   
     
     Can you imagine if this was a very common problem and everyone was 
     sending their own "Dear Genyphyr" follow-up post to BPCS-L?  I realize 
     that's an extreme, but look at all the threads that occur and imagine 
     one extra "Dear Genyphyr" message per thread; they add up.
     
     When I posted a question about something (see post about Returnable 
     Containers) and found out who had a suggestion (<RBakker@MhiMee.NL>) I 
     wrote to him privately to see if he could send me documentation, etc.  
     Why clutter up BPCS-L with that?
     
     I appreciate your suggestion about how to organize my inbox, but I 
     already use an agent to file these.  Whether they're in your main box 
     or an alternate, you still have to scan them all and volume = time. 
     
     Kevin
     
     P.S.  Glad I got your name right.  It's a toughy!
     
     
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Clarification of BPCS-L guidelines
Author:  BPCS-L@midrange.com at Internet 
Date:    02/04/2000 5:56 PM
     
     
Hi,
     
I will give my opinion on this since I was personally mentioned several 
times. First, thanks for spelling my name correctly.
     
I am not the official voice of SSA, and I post replies on my own, not 
because it is 'my job' or because someone told me to 'watch BPCS-L' . I do 
it because I am a AS/400 geek who needs to get a life.  :-)
     
To tell the truth I have been participating on this forum for over a year 
now, under another name. I had people write questions directed to me 
previously during a discussion thread that developed, but no one mentioned 
anything about that being 'off topic' until I now started to post as 
'novakg@ssax.com'.
     
I honestly do not see anything different about Peter's reply than I do to any 
other posting thread that has occurred where someone reports a problem, 
someone else posts additional questions to get more specific about the 
problem, and then the questions are replied to. The fact that he addressed 
his post to "Genyphyr" was out of politeness, and this is done very often on 
the list group. I don't see why that is a problem or why it might be off 
topic.
     
More people than myself and Peter participated in this thread, and in fact 
my intial advice to him was only partially correct, and the correct answer 
to the other part (the BMR at fault for changing the behavior of CEA500BN) 
was posted by another user on the list, Rindi Wheeler. So, obviously others 
had this same problem/question and it DID indeed apply to more than one 
person on the mailing list. Therefore, I don't think the point you bring up 
is particularly valid in this case.
     
This is a mailing list, so naturally it generates e-mail in your mail inbox. 
Most e-mail programs have an agent or filter that can put mail from a 
particular subject line or what have you into it's own folder automatically 
and you can scan and read the mails at your leisure. . .
     
You can also subscribe to the list under 'Yahoo' 'hotmail' or other free 
e-mail address to keep the mailing list mail out of your company mailbox if 
you find the numbers of postings to be over-whelming.
     
Don't count on me for 'insider' SSA news and information. You can do that on 
OGS Online - there is an Info Center where you can ask questions about the 
future direction of the product, and where official replies are given and 
official notices are posted about sunset dates, product bulletins etc.. 
These questions are directed to the SSA Managers who can provide official 
answers. If you don't have access to OGS, you can ask your Sales Rep from 
SSA to get this information for you.
     
I personally would not answer any 'official policy' type questions directly 
(is/when there going to be a 6.1.00 cume), unless an official document 
already was in existence which I could point someone towards.
     
My answers regarding ADK versions, for example are only reflections of the 
official install instructions that come with that product and the official 
support policy of the SSA HelpLine.
     
In other words, I am not going to give out "inside information" that is not 
available elsewhere. I will try to clarify any mis-understandings of SSA's 
policies or information if I notice it.
     
And naturally, some things are truly better handled by a HelpLine call, and 
I will say that in my postings when that is my opinion. I am not part of SSA 
HelpLine any longer. From working there previously, I notice the majority of 
people who post to this list are people who also subscribe to OGS and who do 
call HelpLine - so I really don't think this is going to replace or threaten 
that in any way shape or form.
     
In my postings, I often point out how to better use, navigate or understand 
the other SSA services that exist, such as OGS, or our custom programming 
solutions. Other vendors plug their services here, and as a software vendor 
employee, I choose to plug my companies' services when appropriate to the 
question at hand. As far as I know, that is well within adherence to the 
list guidelines.
     
cheers,
     
Genyphyr Novak
System Software Engineer
SSA
     
"Opinions expressed are MINE - mine mine mine mine all mine"
     
     
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin_Catlin@GM.cytec.com <Kevin_Catlin@GM.cytec.com> 
To: bpcs-l@midrange.com <bpcs-l@midrange.com>
Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 2:26 PM 
Subject: Clarification of BPCS-L guidelines
     
     
     Dean and everyone else:
     
     I would like to get clarification on the proper use of BPCS-L.
     
     First, messages like the one below (sorry to single you out, Peter, 
     there are many who have done this) that are directed at a specific 
     person and regarding a specific problem that one is experiencing which 
     does not have broad relevance to other members of BPCS-L should be 
     e-mailed directly to the person intended, correct?  I would like to 
     ask participants to please do this to reduce the "noise level" of 
     BPCS-L.
     
     Second, I have noticed that Genyphyr Novak of SSA has been an active 
     participant of BPCS-L lately.  While it has been beneficial to have a 
     direct channel via BPCS-L to someone of her experience level at SSA (I 
     too have partaken of her bounty of knowledge in this manner) I would 
     hate to see BPCS-L become some kind of "alternate HelpLine" with 
     people posting messages to Genyphyr/SSA looking for "official" 
     responses here.  I don't expect that Genyphyr or SSA wants it to turn 
     into that, either.  I think this also fits into the first point above 
     as it is a direct message to a single recipient (Genyphyr/SSA) and 
     should be sent via established channels (direct e-mail to her or 
     HelpLine).  The response, of course, would also be outside BPCS-L.
     
     As with anything, there may be exceptions to these guidelines 
     especially if there are benefits for many BPCS-L users (personally, 
     I'd like to post a message to Genyphyr asking about SSA's plans for a 
     V6.1 cume and see what I get back).  I welcome posts from Genyphyr or 
     anyone at SSA that fit this category, just as I would welcome them 
     from BPCS users.  I guess the thing to remember is that our time is 
     precious and our e-mail abundant, so please keep it relevant to all.
     
     Comments welcomed.
     
     Kevin Catlin
     CYTEC Industries
     kevin_catlin@gm.cytec.com
     
______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________ Subject: Re: july99cum
Author:  BPCS-L@midrange.com at Internet Date:    02/01/2000 6:19 AM
     
     
     
Hi Genyphyr,
Our users have not instaled july client, we use green screens for ORD. New 
client is in me PC only, there was User pref set to interactive, i changed 
it to batch.
On ORD700 green screen is user pref. set to Batch.
     
     
CPR135D2          BPCS  BIOTIKA a.s. ?IV� PROSTREDIE        ICL4022B 
31/01/00
Oprava                Spr�va aktiv�t servera                HALUSKA 
21:41:38
     
     
Server
CEA500B Stav servera
Akt�vny Spust. rady na��tan
     
et cetera...
     
+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com. 
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. 
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---
     
     
+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com. 
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. 
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---

+---
| This is the BPCS Users Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com
+---