 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscape net> wrote:
> You have trouble with everything I write, you always try to polemicize
> everything I post. If you're so interested in this why don't you do what
> some have done here and go to the site and find out.
> You can't find out? Are you a noob web surfer? Learn to dig in the sites
> a little, that's the way the WWW is for now, you have to do a little
> "homework" to get your "candy".
> Anyways, the resulting database with the names of the proteins and the
> results of the folding will be public and free, it is already for what
> can be considered usuful. "World Community Grid has a network of
> dedicated partners, each bringing their special expertise and contribution."
> Is all there you just want me to convince you of joining with a long and
> detailed explanation, well I won't if you are an adult and have a
> conscience you would want at least know about it and get the information
> on your own.
Your answer would have been much better if you had written only that
third paragraph and left the others out. Would it have been so difficult
to do so?
If you want people to help, you use something called diplomacy. You answer
their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You don't
start to argue nor question their motives.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> I'd rather base my opinion on explicit statements by the parties
> involved, and not on "what makes sense".
And I'd rather ask questions to the parties involved, and not Saul ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> Imagine I'm representing a relief agency and have a physical booth in
> some community event. I'm asking for donations. If people came to me and
> asked for details on how the money will be spent (e.g. on what projects,
> how much does the agency use for salaries, etc), would it help for me to
> say "Just go to the Web site. We're backed by the State Department, etc.
> Why do you doubt us with such backing?"
But Saul is not officially "representing" WCG. Your analogy breaks right
there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Saul Luizaga schrieb:
>
>>>> You can download it at WCG (www.worldcommunitygrid.org) or at
>>>> Berkeley University (boinc.berkeley.edu).
>>>
>>> What I have trouble with is the question, "who benefits?" - I don't
>>> see this explicitly answered at a prominent place, which to me raises
>>> the question why that is so.
>>>
>>> Who qualifies to use the WCG? Who decides who qualifies? Are the
>>> scientific results published without a fee, or will I have to pay to
>>> see the research results my computer has helped generating?
>>
>> You have trouble with everything I write, you always try to polemicize
>> everything I post.
>
> Um... could it be that /you/ are having a problem here?
>
> All I did was point out that I, personally, have unanswered questions
> regarding this thing that I'm uneasy about, which I raised here in hopes
> that you - as a person who seems so enthusiastic about the project that
> I had expected you to be well-informed - might be able to answer them,
> or give me some useful pointers.
He's not an IBM employee, to know everything about it. Maybe he *doesn't*
know the answers to your questions, he's just less paranoid than you are so
he uses it anyway.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> Words are pretty meaningless for judging someone's character. You can't
> tell the quality of a person from what they (or someone else) posts about
> them on a website.
Well, I wasn't referring to this particular or any other website, I mean
in real life where you can see people say & act over time, I meant that
gives away a persons true self, you can't be a hypocrite all your life
without at least someone noticing it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> You answer
> their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You don't
> start to argue nor question their motives.
But... but... but... this is the *internet*!
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:14:37 -0500, Warp wrote:
> If you want people to help, you use something called diplomacy. You
> answer
> their questions and concerns in a respectful and understanding way. You
> don't start to argue nor question their motives
Well said, Warp.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez schrieb:
> He's not an IBM employee, to know everything about it. Maybe he *doesn't*
> know the answers to your questions, he's just less paranoid than you are so
> he uses it anyway.
Then it would be easy (and also more helpful and, as Jim points out,
less deterring) to answer "I don't know anything about that, but I
personally am convinced that the project is ok" if he intends to promote
the project, or alternatively not answer at all if he doesn't bother.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/11/09 12:30, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> But Saul is not officially "representing" WCG. Your analogy breaks right
> there.
And so all he has to say is "I don't know."
Heck, I'd accept that even in the case I provided. I wouldn't mind a
relief agency representative saying that - at least he's being honest.
--
Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/11/09 12:29, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> I'd rather base my opinion on explicit statements by the parties
>> involved, and not on "what makes sense".
>
> And I'd rather ask questions to the parties involved, and not Saul ;)
And I'd accept Saul saying, "That's a good question. I really don't
know - probably somewhere on the site".
--
Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
