Category Opinion
Bookmark :              

In the past few weeks there have been a couple of big bruhahas that have blown up in the Lotus blogosphere. First there was the whole Red Bull thing, followed by the Workspace VS Bookmarks discussion, and then the Notes sucks... no it doesn't spat heated up again. And the one thing that I left with from all of those discussions was a broad yet simple realization:

People are quick to criticize things of which they have little to no firsthand knowledge.

With regard to the "Notes sucks" discussions it is evident that the Notes Sucks camp hasn't seen the Notes client in years - mainly the R5 timeframe, when the Notes client did indeed suck. And the Notes Rocks people are no better - most of them haven't used Outlook/Exchange for years either, which is no better. On both sides they say the other side sucks, citing things that they are either parroting from others, or they are regurgitating items from their brief (and ancient) experience. The basic action is to scream accusations and negative claims of which they have little to no first-hand knowledge.

The same thing can be said of the Workspace VS Bookmarks people. Virtually all of the Workspace people haven't given the bookmark interface a chance since they were first introduced in R5 - and they sucked there (like the rest of that client). Sure, there are some people who have given bookmarks a good field test - they have tried to use them for an extended period of time, and have decided that they are not for them. Fine. But the rest of the workspace people who trash the bookmark interface without ever having used it are simply mimicing others with a "me too!" mentality.

The reality is that nothing - nothing - is as bad as the "other side" claims. All of these items have faults - no doubt. But all of them also seem to be serving their respective purposes, and all of them have their supporters - and detractors.

I have a suggestion - a request really. I propose that we stop the shrill "___________ SUCKS!" litany, and only speak of those things of which we have first-hand knowledge. Don't make blanket statements - give specifics.

Don't parrot the accusations of others - only speak of those things of which you have personal knowledge. And if you want to claim the Bookmark interface sucks, then use it, in the latest release (Notes 7),  soley for a month first. If you want to say Outlook blows, then use DAMO with the latest release of Outlook for a month first. And if, for whatever reason, you don't have the opportunity to use a product you are so eager to trash (such as Domino or Exchange), then feel free to cite the claims of others - but give attribution: "Well, I believe Exchange blows because Wild Bill said such-and-such about it, based on his first-hand experience."

I am just sick of seeing stupid arguments that are nothing more than claims based on last century's technology, or are simply arguments being parroted from others. It is a worthless and tiring conversation bordering on mental masturbation - and I refuse to participate in discussions that degrade to that level. Or, if I do, don't be surprised if I challenge your assertions with questions such as "Is this based on personal experience, or are you parroting someone else's claims?", "What version are you talking about? If you don't know (because you're simply repeating someone else), or the version you are speaking of is over 3 years old, go away."

I love civil discourse - but I love civil discourse when the participants are knowledgeable and are discussing things of which they have first-hand knowledge. Otherwise it is worthless.

Sorry for the rant, just had to get that off my chest. Your thoughts, as always, are welcome.

Rock
**I bet one legend that keeps recurring throughout history, in every culture, is the story of Popeye.~Jack Handey