FilePro Programmer Needed

[John Esak]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com]On Behalf Of Fairlight
> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2006 4:15 AM
> To: filePro Mailing List
> Subject: Re: FilePro Programmer Needed

>
> 1) I might have been interested myself, had the request actually
> given some
> notion of what the application did, or some kind of context.
> It's not like
> I'm a stranger to web application programming.  It's simply impossible to
> make an informed business decision with no hard facts or data.  [And it's
> even more lopsided to stipulate a deadline without providing either.]

I totally disagree, still... :-)  Making an informed business decision??
What, more than deciding to place a phone call and ask for particulars? A
nanosecond for the decision, and possibly 5 minutes to determine whether the
particulars suit you... and whether you can suit his needs. You must be VERY
busy not to feel investing this much time isn't or couldn't be worth it to
you.


>
> 2) If I'm in that boat, so is anyone else approaching the post.  Which
> means he's likely to see little to no response.  What responses

This is the most falatious argument I have ever heard, it being solely based
on a completely unfounded supposition that you arrive at simply by
"projecting" your perceptions onto everyone else. I would win every
debate/discussion/argument ever entered if I could just say something like
this and have it hold water. :-)

> he does see
> will be based on his original premise, which more or less invites someone
> to either take him for a financial ride and deliver nothing or
> shoddy work,
> or just fail the objective entirely.  That isn't going to be good for him
> or his organisation.

This is such a complete non-sequitor as to not merit any response... other
than to note it as such.



> 3) I'm not saying -all- the particulars should be posted publicly, but
> John..."a VB application" is so little as to make it next to impossible
> to guage whether or not one should bother following up.  I showed him
> enough respect to say what I thought was wrong with the request instead of

No, disagree again. Just saying VB ap says it all. If I saw someone post
that he had a "filePro" application that he wanted converted to something
else... I would not have to hear anything other than "filePRo application".
Either I know filePro or I don't. Going over what the app does and how it
does it is part of the either paid-for or on-speculation evaluation that
needs to be done before any contract is entered. Just knowing the source and
destination languages is enough to equip anyone to do this evaluation.
Stating any more that shouldn't be necessary. If someone said they had a C
application and wanted it turned into Perl, you wouldn't want him throwing
out any more than that on a request like this... Why? Someone posting a
job-request like this is more vetting prospecte applicants than the other
way around. He is helping you by giving you the broad context of the work
and it is *you* who should know whether you have the right "stuff" or not.
In this example, he is saving everyone who doesn't know VB from the bother
of applying. Makes sense to me. The details (which may even be private or
confidential) are not for this first announcement.

> blowing it off as a crank post, deleting it, and going on gaming.  I gave
> him time and effort to try to help him rethink his methods so he
> would reap
> more benefit.

We agree to disagree... however, there is absolutely NOTHING,not one iota of
evidence in the original post that this could be a crank request. You seem
to be seeing gremlins where there don't appear to be any. Think of all the
docotrs you know. Can you believe any one of them would place this post in a
much different way. Not hardly... and think again, do you really feel he is
going to read your response and re-submit his request? My guess is... he
won't even come back to this list to read any applications or messages of
any type. He mentioned contacting him directly, didn't he? Don't remember
already, but he did not sound in the least to me like an avid reader of this
list, but more like someone who was looking for help in a place someone told
him about that might garner him a good response.


> 4) That kind of request -is- a red flag to most freelancers that someone
> either doesn't know what they want or can't elucidate it, and it will turn
> into the proverbial Project From Hell that either never ends, or ends with
> the contractor deep in the red.  Been there, done it, won't do it again.
> Got private mail from another party that said the same warning bells went
> off for them on this post.  I know I'm not alone here.

Nope, still disagree. I did not see ANY of that in his post, and I just
re-read it. Yes, you may not be alone, but all that means is that there are
a couple of you who are wrong instead of one.


> So why tell him?  So that maybe he can rethink his approach and put up
> something that will actually generate the kind of help he needs, rather
> than getting either nothing or possibly screwed over.  Sure, I could have
> hit delete.  He wouldn't learn anything then though, nor be likely to
> possibly increase his odds of success.

Read my earlier resonse... no way... and as far as that goes. My guess is
that MANY, less finicky than you, people have already responded to him and
there are several talks between him and them going on as we speak. To
assume/state-categorically/even-conjecture that this project is going to be
badly done, turn out badly or in some way not get accomplished to everyone's
satisfaction is well, I don't know what it is... probably just that
conjecture... but I guess my point is here that it is negative conjecuture
and again I ask why?  Is it because you agree with the definition of an
optimist? That being a pesimist who knows better? :-)


> While I don't feel hostile about your post or your or anything, your other
> post lumping me in with Walter's bashing fP is not quite deliniating
> enough, IMHO.  I didn't bash fP.  I said fP talent is far more scarce/rare
> than VB, basically, and that's absolutely true.  VB coders are dime a
> dozen.  That, and I cited the possibility that someone might
> confuse fP and
> FileMaker Pro with such a vague proposal, which we all know happens quite
> often in general anyway, as has been cited probably hundreds of times on
> this list.  That's about the only "negative" stuff that might possibly be
> construed about anything I said about fP in -my- post.  I wouldn't say I
> was bashing fP, John.  At all.  Didn't even question the direction of the
> migration.  In fact, given VB, I'd actually say it's a really -good- idea
> to go that direction.


The lumping in was only to the extent that you were both negative about the
request ... rather than just answering the request ... and yes, this was
unfair of me, perhaps.  But seriously, Mark, aren't you aware of the dozens,
maybe even 100+ people at least who *never* post on this list because they
are afraid that there posts will spark a response taking them to task for
one niggling thing or another... some of them going way overboard on the
smallest of "infractions" as seen by the current taskmaster? You mention
private responses. If I were to dredge up all the messages I have from
regular folk who say exactly that... and count in the statements from MANY
people who frequent the FP Room... it would be a huge number. Some of the
people who say they are intimidated by this list and therefore don't *ever*
contribute or comment would amaze you. It's all too just too bad and too
sad... and hence, this is why I'm constantly butting heads with, disagreeing
with, arguing with, even  attacking if you want all the messages that
propagate this all-to-true feeling. These people are mostly right. Yeah, I
know, you're going to say... "Well, we're all adults... why can't they stand
up for what they think like everyone else? Why are they such wimps... so
thin-skinned, etc.?"  My response before you have to ask... is *why* should
they be made to feel this way on a forum that just talks about their chosen
product? Who cares about the nitty-gritty formality, netiquette, and
political correctness of all this nonsense in the end anyway?  Not me.


> Ordinarily, I'd take your point about the difference between
> $300k vs $30k.
> However, having actually gotten burned by horribly vague offers and jobs
> that remained vague as far as halfway through the project (and then being
> asked for a complete spec change), I think it's also safe to say that from
> my end, I'd rather make $30k doing $30k of work than $30k doing
> $300k worth
> of work.  Know what I mean?

C'mon... the problems you state above... are *clearly* your fault. If
something isn't well spelled out... if something isn't agreed to in
advance... etc., etc. It is certainly on your side, not the employer's. You
control the contract, he controls the signature... you have the contract and
specs to refer to at will... what does he have?


> filePro's strengths or weaknesses have -nothing- to do with the situation
> or the post, IMHO.  Pretty much most things can be translated to most
> other things given enough time and resources.  Yes, I have seen Alan
> Mazuti's wonderful work on his web interfacing.  He's done some gorgeous
> stuff.  The technology has nothing to do with my post.  I'm not against
> the direction they want to go.  If I was, I wouldn't be selling a product
> that helps facilitate it.  I'm for sane business practises like
> saying what
> you're actually starting with (at least in some minimal specific detail
> other than "an application") if you're going to make a public request for
> help--especially one stipulating a deadline a mere month away.
> That's what
> it all it boils down to.

Okay, if that is the boiled down bottom line... then... I see absolutely
NOTHING wrong with someone/anyone placing a note like this on this list:

filePro programmer wanted. Call xxx-xxx-xxxx for details. ABC Company, Inc.

Let the *details* be worked out by the parties interested. The gentleman who
left tht post we are gnattering about left far *more* than he had to, and
again I say, it was helpful what he left. At least, all the programmers who
nothing about VB were saved a phone call and a few minutes. I still ne no
need for anything much more than what he wrote, or even the one-liner above.


> I can't speak for Walter, nor do I want to.  Whatever he said is his own
> opinion.  He may have agreed with what I said, but please don't lump me in
> under fP-bashing when I wasn't, even if he actually may have
> been?  Please?
> Pretty please with one of those great big delicious sundaes on top,
> complimentary cherry included?  :)

Like I said, that was unfair of me.... but the lumping-in was not about
bashing filePro, but just overall negativeness. Your explanation that you
were trying to be helpful in your post is accepted on face value. I kind of
thought so, but your message had the tone of being accusatory and
condemnatious (like that word, huh?)  rather than just being helpful. "What
self-respecting programmer would deign to answer your request when you have
stated it so poorly..." being a quick synopsis of it all. In any case, I
shouldn't have lumped-in.


> Seriously, my thrust was exactly what I just said above--nothing more,
> nothing less.  And in my mind, it did serve a singular purpose; get the
> person to rethink how they're asking for help so they have a better yield
> on results, both in quantity and quality.  I don't think that's terribly
> ignoble as a goal, no matter how ineloquent I was in conveying it.  I'll
> admit, my execution could have been better.  The intent, however, was
> nothing untoward.

Noted, accepted... and no apology given because of your now-admitted
possible in-eloquence. Had your note come across the way you thought it
would... I would have never written mine... and so on and so on.


> I believe I understand your reaction, and having reread my post twice in a
> row just now, I believe I understand how I was taken the wrong
> way.  It was
> poorly written, to be honest, and not necessarily from the best of moods,
> at that.  The fact remains that my -intent- was sincerely to help the
> man get better results than what he posted is likely to generate.  And I
> still wholeheartedly maintain that that kind of vague description sets off
> sirens, klaxons, strobing laser light shows, car alarms for three blocks,
> and the K-Mart blue light special light--for anyone that's ever followed
> up on something written that vaguely, tried to see it through, and been
> burned really badly by the end of it.  In the interest of wanting to see
> him -not- drive people away or turn them off automaticlaly, I suggested
> that he rethink his strategy and noted why.  I also gave what I consider a
> sound strategy to follow.  He is, of course, free to follow whatever path
> he likes.

I wonder how long... how many words we could each use to write the same
thing over and over? :-) I'm guessing about 10e250?

>
> I would hope that clears up my purpose in posting what I did, to a
> reasonable degree of satisfaction.
>
> Bests,
>
> mark->

I am satisfied that we each have made our points clearly... and ... and I
hope there is no further "and"... :-)

John Esak