June 2, 2009 at 12:54 pm
jcrawf02 (6/2/2009)
I have a bridge to sell them . . . 😉
Really? I've always wanted to own a bridge, that way I could charges tolls.
But seriously, I think that's one of the reasons this site has so much great content and a strong user community.
-Luke.
June 2, 2009 at 12:59 pm
The concept is crap, but I'd rather see it published and debunked than left out there.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
June 2, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Luke L (6/2/2009)
jcrawf02 (6/2/2009)
I have a bridge to sell them . . . 😉Really? I've always wanted to own a bridge, that way I could charges tolls.
But seriously, I think that's one of the reasons this site has so much great content and a strong user community.
-Luke.
That, and it is free. Where else can you get such great advice, a sense of community, the opportunity to help others at such a great price!
June 2, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (6/2/2009)
Whether it's right or wrong, I come down on the side of allowing authors to have a voice and make their position known. I like the debate, and I like the discussions that follow. I think it's better than judging someone's work and not publishing it because I personally disagree, or censoring it because I think it's "bad".I don't think "bad" and "good" describe things well for technical debates. There's "better" and "worse" in situations, but no absolutes. I'm not sure there are than many absolutes outside of technology in life either. Most things are gray with situational dependencies.
We grow and learn from our mistakes. If you want to write, you need to live with that.
Too many "experts" think that only their advice, only their experienced thoughts should be published. I heavily disagree with that.
Being one of those that's had the chance to stretch & grow & learn by writing for this site, I'm with you 100%.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
June 2, 2009 at 1:25 pm
I dont think any of my articles would have been published in another site than here. Especially the Upsert I was trying to push as a good idea. (It is a debatable idea) 🙂
-Roy
June 2, 2009 at 1:37 pm
On here, we may not always realized what the world can be like. All it takes is one visit from the window washer and we then have a much clearer view.
🙂
For best practices on asking questions, please read the following article: Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help[/url]
June 2, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Roy Ernest (6/2/2009)
I dont think any of my articles would have been published in another site than here. Especially the Upsert I was trying to push as a good idea. (It is a debatable idea) 🙂
While we're admitting to mistakes - I've made a potentially devastating one, by not researching encryption thoroughly enough - and judging by the font size the OP's a tad upsert about it. http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic727342-146-1.aspx#bm727652
Can anyone dig me out of a hole?
June 2, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Tom,
Wow, that is a big font, I wonder if it was done intentionally? It hurt my eyes to read it 😛
Here's a blog post by Buck Woody that he links to whenever he provides code.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
June 2, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Looks like he may have tested in Production :w00t:
That is a large font........
Greg E
June 2, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Font edited, and pick me up added. You can't "regen" the symm key with the same certificate. It creates a new key, encrypted by the same certificate.
And Lynn, don't quote his font!
June 2, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (6/2/2009)
Font edited, and pick me up added. You can't "regen" the symm key with the same certificate. It creates a new key, encrypted by the same certificate.And Lynn, don't quote his font!
I thought I'd editted that. Must have fat fingered that, sorry.
June 2, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Greg Edwards (6/2/2009)
Looks like he may have tested in Production :w00t:That is a large font........
Greg E
Steve:
You might want to put something in that thread about editing the font size. Otherwise, it makes the responses that mention it seem a little odd.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
June 2, 2009 at 2:48 pm
GSquared (6/2/2009)
The concept is crap, but I'd rather see it published and debunked than left out there.
Here's my full take (much easier here than on Twitter - damn 140 character limit!):
SSC is a major site, and each article gets thousands of hits. Most of the readers probably don't bother to look at the discussion at all, and of those that do, most probably aren't going to bother reading the whole thing, especially when they see that it's 10 pages long. So what we have is a site that a lot of people love to read, and come to trust after a while. People believe, rightly or wrongly, that if an article is published--here or elsewhere--that the information must be good.
Now put yourself into Joe "I'm Way Too Busy to Read a Discussion" Developer's shoes. He's working on a new search stored procedure with 25 different optional parameters, doesn't know much about SQL Server but can hack his way around, and suddenly this article pops into his inbox. It's been published on his favorite SQL Server web site, so he knows that it's just gotta be good information--right? It tells him exactly what he needs to solve his problem... And it works perfectly when he tests it in the little dev environment. Rock on!
In my humble opinion, operating a big, popular site like SSC brings with it a certain level of responsibility. There are opinions and there are clearly lots of things that we can debate about until we're blue in the face. And then there are accepted best and worst practices that we've learned from years of watching sites go down for no good reason other than that some developer got some bad information on the Web. And in my opinion a site like SSC should be careful about not getting too far into that territory, because a lot more people are going to take the article at face value than are going to bother really digging into it.
But of course, that's just my opinion. And here we are in this debate thread. And now you can "roast" me right back. Enjoy. 😛
--
Adam Machanic
whoisactive
June 2, 2009 at 3:08 pm
I added a note in his post that I changed the font.
June 2, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Adam,
I probably came across as being critical of you by using the word "roast" and that was not my intent. Perhaps I should have said "being taken to task" or something that would come across in a less critical manner.
I appreciate the fact that you have enough concern for the SQL Server community to bring it up.
One other note is that somewhere in this thread we discussed tighter tech review of articles for SSC, but with 5000+ posts I'm not going to look for where, and one of the issues was having people who could help out with it.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
Viewing 15 posts - 5,236 through 5,250 (of 66,712 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply