Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
okay, quick perusal of my gmail tells me it was Jim Melton that relaid that particular story. Cheers, Bryan Rasmussen On 9/4/07, bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@g...> wrote: > Well somewhere in one of the earlier threads someone described a > second hand report from an impeccable source that some of the new > members had asserted they had been told what to say and had their > membership fees paid and they did not understand the subject. If this > is the case I suppose they could be not especially technical and still > go, they could be the dreaded marketing people. > > > Cheers, > Bryan Rasmussen > > On 9/4/07, Dave Pawson <davep@d...> wrote: > > Elliotte Harold wrote: > > > > > Yes, I do. For one thing, in at least the U.S. and possibly other > > > jurisdictions, what I propose is a legal concept that can lead to civil > > > damages and perjury charges. > > > > > > More importantly, at least some people actually take such statements > > > seriously and are hesitant to affirm blatant falsehoods. Engineers and > > > scientists in particular find it very hard to flat out lie or even > > > dissemble in situations like this. > > > > > > > Now if it were PR folks or salespeople who were joining the standards > > > processes, then I suspect they would probably just go ahead and lie > > > through their teeth without a second thought. > > > > But surely its the marketing / sales people that are paying for this > > Elliotte, and hence are calling the tune? Vote this way or that. > > If the engineer objects, find another engineer that wants a trip to X > > and will vote as 'the company' wants. > > > > Perhaps my cynicism matches Bryans. > > > > > > regards > > > > -- > > Dave Pawson > > XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. > > http://www.dpawson.co.uk > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
