Re: Fast Forward (fwd) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 01:17:15AM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> 
> Here's my response to the inaccurate article cmp produced.  After
> chatting with Marc I decided to post it myself.
> ... 
> Where do you get your info?  Do you just make it up?  PostgreSQL is
> not a product of Great Bridge and never has been.  It's 100% independant.
> Is Linux a keyword you figure you can use to draw readers?  Won't take
> long before folks determine you're full of it.  The PostgreSQL team takes
> great pride (not to be confused with great bridge) in ensuring that the
> work we do runs on ALL platforms; be it Mac's OSX, FreeBSD 4.3, or even
> Windows 2000.  So why do you figure this is a Great Bridge product?  Why
> do you figure it's Linux only?  What is it with you writers lately?  Are
> you getting lazy and simply using Linux as a quick out for a paycheck?

This is probably a good time to point out that this is the _worst_
_possible_ response to erroneous reportage.  The perception by readers
will not be that the reporter failed, but that PostgreSQL advocates are 
rabid weasels who don't appreciate favorable attention, and are dangerous 
to write anything about.  You can bet this reporter and her editor will 
treat the topic very circumspectly (i.e. avoid it) in the future.  
When they have to mention it, their reporting will be colored by their 
personal experience.  They (and their readers) don't run the code, 
so they must get their impressions from those who do.  

Most reporters are ignorant, most reporters are lazy, and many
are both.  It's part of the job description.  Getting angry about
it is like getting angry at birds for fouling their cage.  Their
job is to regurgitate what they're given, and quickly.  They have no 
time to learn the depths, or to write coherently about it, or even 
to check facts.

None of the errors in the article matter.  Nobody will develop an
enduring impression of PG from them.  What matters is that PG is being 
mentioned in the same article with Oracle.  In her limited way, she
did the PG community the biggest favor in her limited power, and all 
we can do is attack?

It will be harder than the original mailings, but I urge each who
wrote to write again and apologize for attacking her.  Thank her 
graciously for making an effort, and offer to help her check her 
facts next time.  PostgreSQL needs friends in the press, even if
they are ignorant or lazy.  It doesn't need any enemies in the press.

Nathan Myers
ncm@zembu.com