excel macro call filePro?

[Fairlight]

Is it just me, or did Mike Rathburn say:

> |-----Original Message----- 
> |From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> |[mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com]On Behalf Of Rick
> |Hane Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 9:23 AM To: filepro-list at seaslug.org
> |Subject: Re: excel macro call filePro?
> |
> |>I can be contacted off-list regarding this.
> |>
> |>mark-> --
> |
> |I was just about to delete this when I decided I was upset enough to
> |respond to the list.

I'm sorry you were upset, Rick.  Hardly my intent.

> |The traffic on this list is often very useful.  Sorry to say that on
> |other times the dribble and useless banter take of way too much band
> |width.  Now with all that said, why wouldn't something as useful as this
> |thread not be listed here for all to see.  I am NOT siggesting that Art,
> |Scott or Mark did anything wrong; they didn't.  It's just that this
> |question has appeared many times in various forms on this list.

And apparently it has never been solved publicly, if it keeps getting asked
and nobody points towards the archives or delvers a ready answer, and you
were upset enough that it wasn't answered that you felt the need to voice
your concern.

I can say that I personally did -not- know the answer going into it.
However, my wife, Kelly, is an engineer and an Excel wiz.  I used to use
Lotus 123, but never really got into Excel.  She uses it a lot.  So I asked
her to help me look into it on speculation as an intellectual exercise and
to see if we could provide the answer readily, when Scott asked on the
list.  This was -supposed- to be like a 15min investigation.

Two hours later, we finally had a proven, working solution, with both of us
giving feedback to the other the whole time.  That's four man-hours, and I
hadn't planned on spending that much time on it alone, let alone involving
Kelly and spending her time.

Generally, if there's something I just know off the cuff, or even have to
put less than 30min into finding the answer to, and I feel like it, I'll
just venture the answer for free.

In this case, considering the effort we expended in figuring out a
safe way to achieve this, I felt that it was something we weren't
unjustified in wanting compensation for.  It wasn't simply a case of
knowledge being money, it was more an investment in time to acquire the
knowledge--intentionally, in this case...not just by and by.  And since
pretty much all the consultants here have agreed that if we do something
on-list it's gratis, but if we take it off-list, it's chargeable, I decided
that it was in our best interest to take it off-list and pursue that course
of action.  Much as I like helping people, it's nice to be able to pay the
bills.

So I contacted Scott off-list, and we worked something out.  He appears
satisfied, as I haven't heard otherwise.  Now if I do that with one person,
I don't feel that they should have to pay, and then have me turn around and
burn them by releasing the solution to everyone else for nothing.  That's
unfair to them.  So in the interests of fairness, yes, I'm charging for my
knowledge on the matter, and will continue to do so in private, off-list.

I suppose I could have just remained silent and let it ride that there
appeared to be no solution if nobody else came forward.  I decided to at
least make that much known publicly so people had hope, and the potential
for pursuing a remedy if they so chose.  Nobody's holding a gun to their
head and making them deal with me.  If they want to put in the time
figuring out a scheme for doing it themselves, they're free to.  I at least
freely said it's quite possible.  Apparently nobody here had figured that
out for sure, to date.  So we are where we are, with the decisions I made.

> |Please if you have information to add to a thread which appears here, do
> |it so all can see.

I did have information to add to the thread.  Said information was that
there is indeed a working solution.  That I didn't deliver the entire thing
on a silver platter with a a full place setting, gratis, is apparently what
upset someone.  Unfortunately, not all knowledge is freely available.  I'm
altruistic enough that I wish it were.  That's not reality though.
Sometimes things come at a cost.  Whether that cost is figuring out
yourself on one's own dime, or paying a modest fee for an instant answer is
entirely one's own choice.

> Mark has the answer.  He's easy to work with and reasonably priced.  The
> internet has spoiled us in many ways (mail lists, Google and Brianboost),
> but sometimes you've still got to pay to play.

Thanks, Mike.  Glad you understand, and I appreciate the kind words.

Hey, I like helping people.  If it wasn't for creditors and cost of living,
I'd do it for free all the time, just for the enjoyment.  That's not the
society we live in though.

I've put in a lot of time looking into stuff off-the-cuff in the past, for
free.  This wasn't even -just- me though, it was also Kelly, and getting it
down right took us both longer than either of us anticipated.  I suppose
I can understand someone feeling offended that I'd think of doing it the
way I did.  I don't agree with them, but I can respect their concerns.
However, I made a series of decisions, and I really don't regret it them
this point.  I'm simply sorry that it offended at least Rick.  However,
for the stated reason, I can't reverse the decision after the fact, as it
wouldn't be fair to Scott.

Bests,

mark->
-- 
Bring the web-enabling power of OneGate to -your- filePro applications today!

Try the live filePro-based, OneGate-enabled demo at the following URL:
               http://www2.onnik.com/~fairlite/flfssindex.html