Why Coffee is no more Coffee place any more?

Hi Just checking out any fun rolling over here..But disappoiting from long time.

Where are those days where every one put comments pulling legs having fun.

All work discussions. Seems to be time to say good bye to Coffee

open a TEA Point

Regards

sas

SAP Managed Tags:
SAP Community

You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.

Comment

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (2)

This message was moderated.

You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.

Comment

Only civil and polite conversations need apply.

I will keep you posted as the Report Abusive behaviour alerts come in....!

Hi Julius -

Is there also a system here at SCN for reporting the "tyranny of the majority"?

For example - those who think that comments about "cricket" are appropriate for this venue ?

Or those who think that comments about "Friday's" and "vacations" are appropriate for this venue?

I haven't been able to find a system for reporting "the tyranny of the majority" - that's why I took the opportunity to report it via my response here.

And BTW, there was nothing uncivil or impolite about my post.

Ask any old-timer here about what an actual "uncivil" and "impolite" post from djh sounds like.

Best as always

djh

Well I completly disagree with you my friend ( Hopefully) Coffee Corner is a place where you relax and have some chit chat.

Doesnt mean that always sharing knowledge makes Humans friends. The purpose of community is to Make all the people unity.

if you mean only Technical knowledge people will become friends then its quite obvious that the TOP level guy can talk with only another TOP . and you see you haven't paid here if you spend some time here. Its all voluntary contribution and every one welcomes a sort of FUN.

and More over There are wide variety of Technologist and different communities people over here how you make them feel ONE. By just sharing there Office fun , culutural traditions , intrestes and etc. Even lot of people admit personally they get to know lot of new things with sort of conversational talk .

Strategies, Documents , along with a cup of Coffee( Humour) is always Good to health. Get well soon dear David.

You are just like one DEAN in ONE medical college who always say never treat Patient as Friend or some relative. Always treat professionally then only you can treat them better.

Regards

Sas

I think that the funnier aspects should keep having their home here as well, next to the contents you are referring to. That's what made the Coffee Corner the Coffee Corner, in my opinion. Mutual tolerance provided.

Thomas

Well said Thomas this is what I mean.

IF you are too idealistic , and you are too pessemistic who always thinks knowledge Knowledge then Just read the content what you find useful ignroe the other why you bother about others. These things you also know but just a thought.

Regards

sas

I don't drink coffee, I take tea my dear.


> Is there also a system here at SCN for reporting the "tyranny of the majority"?

Yes. If you think a posting is beyond the pale, or violates the spirit of the community, hit the abuse report, and it will be looked into.

matt

Serioulsy thought the rules of the coffee corner were that David got to post any deep thought that should have been a blog, but folks complained about him "hunting ponits" via blogs so it ended up creating this forum. After several years, this forum ended up becoming a wasteland for all other misfit conversations that logically somehow don't relate to SAP, i.e cricket thread, friday thread, etc.

I'm of course in favor of having both in this forum, so I think probably the issue is seeing the "deep thought" posts that started this area in the first place re-appear! The great part is that if the "deep thought/work related stuff" bores you, you can always ignore those posts

Take care,

Stephen

Exactly, and vice versa, so "mutual tolerance". I always like to read Dave's blogs due to his vast experience in many areas, and I would like to see more thought-provoking threads here as well. Everybody is invited to raise the level.

I understand you guys were here before anybody else, but obviously there is a "market" for the lighter stuff as well. Also, this has been a great place to become acquainted with some specifics of other cultures.

Thomas

Hi Stephen - thanks for the succour.

But I want to point out the actual motivation for Mark/Mark/Marilyn/Craig creating Coffee Corner. (It's not actually, or not primarily, the motivation you mention, because djh was always happy to blog in the no-points "ranting" category.)

Here's what the original motivation was.

Being good diplomats, Marl/Mark/Marilyn/Craig understood that:

a) SAP should not appear to be in the position of censoring any viewpoints on SAP-related matters;

but at the same time, they also understood that:

b) there are some "anti-SAP" viewpoints that don't belong on the "front page", given the fact that this page is read by folks who don't have sufficient context and also may not understand the notion of "loyal opposition", (By "anti-SAP" I mean, of course. disagreements with SAP on particular matters about which reasonable parties can disagree.)

That's why the Coffee Corner was created, although it was billed in a more general way as a place for discussion of notions that were not perhaps focussed enough or of sufficient interest to the general community to warrant a blog.

And that's why I find the "fun threads" so profoundly depressing.

They remind me of political culture here in the US.

The Bill of Rights gives all in the US to speak their minds meaningfully on the issues, and instead of meaningful discourse and debate, we here in the US get the kind of trival asinine discussion that one finds on Fox and MSNBC cable.

Same thing here - SAP kindly gives folks a place to be "legally" anti-SAP when they feel they need to be, and can make a case for doing so.

And what does it degenerate into?

Cricket, and Fridays, and vacations ,,,

Since the languages of most SCN contributors descend from Indo-European, most will be able to translate the Latin:

"O tempora, o mores".

If not, it is easily Googleable.

Best

djh

<removed_by_self>

Edited by: Julius Bussche on Jul 5, 2011 8:33 PM

This message was moderated.

Weird conversation but let's see how this started:

1) Complaints about the conversations of lately not being fun enough

2) Complaints back about conversations being not serious from the folks accused of being not fun enough

3) Then some how some weird transition of terms into something completely different where the same words don't carry the same meaning.

I'm going to have to agree with Julius that the wording of what was rejected and not because of use of the term, but rather the tone and fashion it was written in. I could have substitute any other phrase i.e. low-brow and it would have still been over the top.

Take care,

Stephen

Hi again Stephen -

Does the "M" next to your name mean mentor or moderator?

If it means moderator, could I ask you to delete JB's post to me, for the same reason that the moderator "Matt" deleted my initial post?

In particular, JB's post certainly contains more than one "ad hominem" - so that means that beyond a shadow of a doubt, it was personally directed at me.

And this is the reason which Matt gave in his email informing me that my post would be deleted: SCN policy does not tolerate posts that are directed personally at other posters.

(I think you're sharp enough to spot the "ad homs" in JB's post, but if you're not, I'll be happy to list them for you.)

Best

djh

Hi David,

I removed it myself.

I suggest you reflect for a moment before you make posts designed to be hurtful and belittling of others.

sy-subrc = 0?

Julius

I don't know about sy-subrc = 0, JB, so let's just say that "CHECK no_harm_done IS INITIAL" succeeded.

This incident reminds me that I really should have pushed harder for SCN to implement a board where a person who speaks one language L1 could post any proverb in L1 and ask others to give the equivalent in their languages L2, L3, L4, etc.

This board would:

i) be "fun"

ii) promote cross-cultural understanding and "unity" within the SCN community.

So how could it be a bad idea ???

If SAP/SCN ever set up such a board, my first post to it would be the English proverb that some here (not you) should always keep in mind:

"If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen".

How do you say that in German?

Best

djh

David,

Well M is for moderator in this case. I also needed a "timeout" in this situation and basically was going to wait before nuking half of this thread with the abuse/delete/lock buttons.

There is still enough cringe material on this thread that we need to cleanup and move things back up a few posts. I took some liberty of hopefully removing another "personal exchange" so we can calm things down here.

So for everyone if we can agree to stay civil, I think we can keep this open, otherwise I'm leaning towards locking this discussion. If not can we all at least agree to disagree on the topic.

Thank you,

Stephen

Edited by: Stephen Johannes on Jul 5, 2011 2:19 PM

Personally I think it would be about as much fun as Bingo (or umpiring a 5 day cricket match), but that it just me.

Regarding the proverb, I am often mistaken for being German, but am not. I can speak german reasonably well though, but not proficient enough to know the matching proverb.

I lived in Munich for three years and I think it might be "Fahrzuä!" because they used it on me often enough

Cheers,

Julius

I've checked the abuse reports and there was only one post in this thread flagged up there, which has been rejected. Fascinating as I find all the posting in the Coffee Corner, by all contributers, generally I've little time to spend here. So my apologies if there were others than should also have been dealt with.

Edited by: Matt on Jul 5, 2011 10:17 PM

Hi David,

I did read a few of your blogs and do understand from the general banter that you are a very revered man (if i can say so)....but i guess you should understand that the vast majority of the SCN population would be in their mid 20's or mod 30's and might not have the maturity and thought process you have & everyone has a right have their share of fun as long as it is within the accepted framework, a'int it?

I am sure you dont find people discussing and exchanging hot line numbers are peddling stuff on SCN, And just because you have a thought doesnt necessarily mean everyone needs to agree to it (you have a right in not agreeing with me)

well with due apologies i can say nothing more than this "sometimes i wish i was you so i could be friends with me"

Cheers,

Hello SJ -

Did you know that your name (Shekar) sounds like the Armenian word for "sugar"? Perhaps that's why you were sweet enough to say such a kind thing in your post about me being "revered".

Although in that regard, I have to tell you that if you ran the numbers, you would find that I'm more reviled than revered, by far. Even my old friends Mark Finnern and Marilyn Pratt won't stop by to say hello anymore, ever since I posted a blog that irritated someone pretty high-up the food chain somewhere- heh heh heh. Now, I'm just one of the forgotten "Moorsoldaten" of SAP.

In any event, permit me to explain that I have absolutely nothing against 20-40 year-olds having fun, and I even understand (believe it or not) that there are interpesonal and cross-cultural benefits which can accrue from letting people have fun.

The problem is that they're doing it here, instead of asking SAP for a Romper Room where they can have fun to their heart's content. After all, that's how the Coffee Corner came into existence - a few of us who thought of ourselves as the "loyal opposition" suggessted to SAP that the "loyal opposition" needed a place away from the "spotlight" of the front page where they could express reasonable disagreements with SAP's more indefensible choices.

So in all fairness, the fun-bunnies should do the same thing - ask SAP for a Romper Room, instead of trivializing this place to the point where its original purpose is no longer discernible.

There is moreover, one reason why this is a more serious matter than might first appear.

In particular, we all know that SDN/SCN has more wonderful technologists and wonderful functionals than any company could possibly hope for. There are literally dozens of technologists willing to blog at the drop of a hat on whatever new buzzword SAP is pushing this week, and even more functionals willing to blog at the drop of the hat on how SAP is introducing new stuff that will let them do the same things folks did 30 years ago, only "fancier".

And all of these wonderful technologists and functionals are the stars of the show here at SCN/SDN - not to mention TechEds, Sapphires, InnoJams, etc.

But who here at SCN/SDN is speaking for all the clients out there who don't care about what's "new and hot", and are simply wondering why a company that can invest so much money in newfangled buzzwords and gizmos can't invest a relatively much smaller amount in "doing the right thing" - namely, bringing the fundamental ECC 4.6c - 6.0 code base into the 21st century?

Personally, I always hoped that Coffee Corner would become the Forum for those who were willing to speak for those clients, since SCN/SDN offered no other place to do so without seeming unduly "negative" and "disloyal".

But any chance of that happening certainly gets smaller and smaller the more this place comes to resemble a Romper Room, instead of a place where the "loyal opposition" can at least try to convince SAP to do the right thing for clients that it's basically been ignoring for a long time while it tries to prove it can "keep up with the Joneses".

Anyway, glad you took the opportunity to reach out. Best of luck to you in whatever you're doing and wherever your abilities and talents take you.

djh

Hi David,

Thank you for the niceties....although it doesnt make me feel very manly (chuckle...chuckle....being compared with sugar and candy ....i am embarassed)

I dont really want to make this a discussion on personality traits and behavioural patterns....but i guess the problem stems from the fact that you have a certain level of thought process, which for you is quite normal and basic, now your expectation of the world around you is that others understand, agree and get in sync with your thought process (because for you it is a basic and normal thing)....the whole problem starts here..your expectation of people around you ...it takes different kinds of people to make the world tick.....and there are quite a few who dont understand the depth of thought or the fleeting glimpse of brilliance and to be honest there is no point in trying to convince

I can very well understand the way you feel....I am not even a shade of what you are (from what little i gather about you)....but i have the same sense of frustration about quite a few things related to SAP (and not related to SAP too)....the best thing i thought i could do, is to log on to SCN when i feel like....post if i feel like....stay silent if i feel like........when all of these things are in my control, i have no angst

You know what, I am tempted to quote this "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others"

you can read more at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect]

Cheers,

Coffee Corner was never funny.

In my opinion a serious discussion on SAP buzzwords/marketing vs the actual world is more than welcome.

It happens a lot of times, SAP buys a new product / introduces a new technology, and then nobody knows what will happen with the existing one. People are saying your module will be dismissed by the new u2018thingu2019. New experts come out from nowhere, promising heaven and earth.

Usually this confusion scares the customer (who waits wisely before introducing the new product or upgrading the existing technology) and consequently the consultant (no new projects, no money  ). I can give the example of the OutlookSoft acquisition (and FUD on Integrated Planning).

Many experts post on SDN: independents, consultancies, end client permies, SAP employees. So different points of view, thatu2019s why I think a critical discussion on whatu2019s right or wrong in the SAP world (functional and technological) could be very interesting.

Time for me to step in I suppose.

One: a virtual coffee corner, or water cooler, or "off-topic" topic place is a place to rant. It was created to that end and is not limited to SAP topics although some of the best ranting here has been very relevant to the SAP community.

Two: some etiquette of ranting is followed (look up the ad hominem concept to understand what I mean by that please) [Fallacy: Ad homineum|http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html]. Or [ad hominem in Wikipedia|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem] .

Three: Coffee Corner CAN be funny and CAN be fun but not exclusively is it nor was it created for that purpose. In fact, one of the marvels of evolution is that things become more useful than the purpose they were created for or it is common to find things used for different purposes than intended, at times to very interesting, productive, game-changing ends. Impatience spurs innovation and there often is quite a bit of that here in the coffee corner and ....it is welcomed. And talking about spurs....[stirrups were an innovation that changed history |http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirrup] according to some.

When some people started complaining that things introduced in Coffee Corner weren't always trackable and easily implementable, the idea of Idea Place was hatched (or perhaps retrofitted to solve that problem).

I believe there still is need for a place to express personal opinion that mightn't easilty map to products, solutions, topics, concepts already outlined in our forums, wikis, blog topics, and area homepages.

There is a rant blog topic too of course and I think that very legitimate.

When we migrate to Jive (yes, here we go again with talking about all the advantages of the migration), there will be a personal blog concept that will certainly give legitamacy to personal rants and opinions.

Yet I think a place for ranting discussions is still a necessary ingredient of any healthy community.

Not one for idle gossip or personal degrading swipes. But one for passionate debate.

You all seem up to the challenge.

No no Shekar - it's not you who should feel that my calling you "sweet" somehow cast doubts on your masculinity.

Think of it this way - how many times has a woman said to you "that's very sweet of you" when you've offered to do something like fixing a flat tire for her, etc.?

You don't think anything of it because she's a woman, and women use the word "sweet" routinely.

So if anyone should be embarassed, it's me!

Perhaps it's MY masculinity that should be questioned for using a "woman's" term like "sweet" ...

best

djh

Hello Federico!

Although your SCN Business Card shows your country as Italy, I have to believe that your last name is of Spanish origin.

I certainly hope so, because I would like to believe that you were named after one of the greatest poets and "citiizens of the world" who has ever lived - Federico Garcia Lorca. (But on the other hand, if you actually have deep family roots going back to Franco's Guardia Civilia in Spain or to Mussolini's black shirts in Italy, please accept my apologies for making an overtly "political" comment here without knowing the particulars of your background.)

In any event, I agree with you that SAP's flirtations with a new buzzword every couple of years does make it diifficult for all but the most safely entrenched practitioners.

But I want to clarify - that is not the reason why I take issue with SAP on its failure to modernize its core code base.

It's because doing so is the right thing to do, given the nature of the clients who still make up the majority of SAP's revenue stream.

Now granted, SAP did do the right thing by funding the development of enhancements, the switch framework, etc. But while these improvements provide a safer way for clients to add-on to SAP's code, they do not solve the fundamental problem of decoupling the code base from the particular transactional view of the world that's embedded in SAP's standard menus for the various modules.

Best

djh

One of the most frustrating and time consuming things about developing on the SAP platform (I believe it's called Netweaver now or something), is the lack of decent layering and modularisation. In my developments, I routinely do this. It means that over the years I can re-use and enhance and re-use what I've written. And so can others.

In BI Broadcasting recently, I came across some great classes for handling setting ids. The only trouble is, when you run them outside of the context of a BSP/Web Dynpro application,. you get a pop-up asking for a development class (that's a Package, right?). Within the context, it's quite happy just to assign $TMP to the object.

Now that is mixing the model with the view. No no no no no. And this is recent coding.

And on another point with BI. Analysis Authorisations are a relatively recent creation. These were created for BI 7.0. BI 7.0 has implemented start routines and other ABAPpy bits as methods, so all can be nicely OO. So why were Analysis Auths implemented by Function Modules?????

bah!

So why were Analysis Auths implemented by Function Modules?????

I don't know the code, but I strongly suspect it was probably to get a form of persistence "on the cheap".

In the AA code, is the relevant function group accessed more than once during a "session", i.e. earlier and then later?

For example, is a function module in the group called just to "build stuff", and is a second function module called later in order to access the stuff that the first one built?

If so, then the function module that runs later may be taking advantage of "persistent" globals that were set up in the earlier call.

But speaking more generally, Matt, I think we all have to be careful to distinguish between two kinds of SAP problems -

1) less than perfect follow-thru (can happen to any company - look at the shape that Oracle SQLLDR and PL/SQL are STILL in).

2) what I have been calling a "failure of will" - a failure of will to do the right thing because it will only affect the bottom-line in the long-run, not the short run.

I think that Type I problems belong in the forums, except in major cases where they can be promoted to blogs.

But for Type II problems - well, the poor little orhpans have no other home but here at CC ...

Besdt

Yeah this brings up the argument that just because we can OO doesn't mean that OO design is any better. I mean it's pretty darn easy to treat a class as a fancy "function group" by coding all the methods as static. Just because you can inherit/redefine does not mean it gets used effectively.

My favorite example is that even in CRM where the business transactions are the same base physical objects on the database, you still end up with different root clases for the view controllers of different business transaction object types.

Not every transaction type inherits from the same root business transaction view controller in areas such as search or display of details, when logically there should be a root business transaction object class and all subsequent objects descend from that class. If you can't master this for one order transactions which are easily described in a object based/object oriented fashion, then how can you get it right in other areas.

The problem though is that CRM data model because SAP decoupled it from the user interface requires a steep learning curve in some cases, but able to survive the transition from Desktop GUI -> Desktop mobile -> PCUI -> IC Web -> Webclient UI -> Mobile without needing to radically change the business logic layer below. I guess SAP got that data model right 12 years ago, since they have only needed to invest money in usability for CRM and not how the system stores the data.

Oh btw, the BOL model for CRM further abstracts things in the direction that David would want. The BOL objects do not depend on UIl, but rather represent what the BOR should/could have been. Perhaps ERP needs it's own internal BOL layer so that you can build any application on top of those objects. It would definitely allow a way to bring the ERP system forward without having to "rewrite everything".

Take care,

Stephen

Exactly what you wrote here, Stephen:

Perhaps ERP needs it's own internal BOL layer so that you can build any application on top of those objects. It would definitely allow a way to bring the ERP system forward without having to "rewrite everything".

I don't give a rat's ass that I had to clone an antique form routine that calls antique functions in order to create my pseudo-BAPI for F-32.

What I care about is the fact that I DIDN'T have to call a BDC, i.e. I didn't have to stay wedded to the particular transactional view of the world that's represented by a BDC of F-32. And getting away from those paternalistic transaction views is the only way that an SOA version of ECC6 is ever going to become a reality for SAP.

So - yes - a BOL layer that allowed you to couple antique pieces of ECC code would definitely be a step in the right direction ....

Best as always

djh

Hi David.

Actually my surname is not Spanish, but it's quite typical of a small mountain area in the north-east of Italy (Carnia - Friuli).

And thank for the reference to Garcia Lorca the black shirts represented a dark period for Italy, unfortunately there are people that like to persevere in the same errors again and again. There are still a lot of 'nostalgic people' (direct translation) and the economic crisis is not helping.

Anyway I get your point. Maybe my ranting was going into another direction: I'm working in the BI area, so no directly connected with the transactional 'vision of the world' of the ERP side (I just watch the data flows...).

We should create a 'Post your rant here' thread (seen on another forum...) maybe we will reach a posts record

Hi Federico -

Thanks so much for taking the time to reply back.

Yes ... "nostalgic people" ... we have them here too ... they're called the "Tea Party".

But I can't really be angry with them because they're such foolish tools and dupes of the corpocracy, much as they probably are in your country.

Now as for myself, I'm nostalgic to hear this tune a little more often:

Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa,

Bandiera rossa, Bandiera rossa.

Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa,

Bandiera rossa trionferà.

Refrain:

Bandiera rossa la trionferà

Evviva il comunismo e la libertà.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandiera_Rossa

Please tell me it can still be heard occasionally in the streets ... that would make me very happy ...

(And in case anyone is wondering ... the answer is "No - I am not now and have never been a Communist" ... I'm just nostalgic for a time when there was meaningul political discourse among serious people about meaningul alternatives ...

Best

djh

Eh Bandiera Rossa is not trendy anymore, maybe you can hear it from some Marxist-Leninist group in some demonstration/strike (however a couple of weeks ago there was dj playing a balkan remix of Bandiera Rossa in a club here in London, funny that most of the people couldn't understand the lyrics :-D).

But this song is more popular (and maybe you've heard it as well)

O partigiano, portami via,

o bella, ciao! bella, ciao! bella, ciao, ciao, ciao!

O partigiano, portami via,

ché mi sento di morir.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_ciao

And, unfortunately, the 'nostalgic people' are not the 'Tea Party' kind of guys (we have them as well...) they are more like violent skinheads, attacking everyone not in the 'white heterosexual' category (but yes, politics in Italy is very complicated...).

Last thing, I won't despair about the lack of any serious political discourse and alternative, maybe something is going to change (think about what's happening in the North Africa, Indignados movement in Spain and in other parts of Europe). Have you read anything from Slavoj Žižek? You could like it.

federico -

Partisans - yes. Do you know how badly I wanted to fight as a partisan somewhere in my youth? They knew life to the fullest, even when the enemy left them with too little of it. In fact, I had to explain to my friends that my opposition to the Vietnam War was rooted neither in isolationism nor personal pacifism. I just wanted to fight for a good cause - not a bad cause. I mean - if Johnson and Nixon had decided to take out the Greek colonels in 1968 instead of trying to defend Church real estate in Southeast Asia, I would have been there with bells on ...

Anyway, someone else mentioned Zizek to me so I guess I'm going to have to check him out - thanks for the reference.

very best regards

djh

Hi David,

Im not privy to some of the "moderated" comments in this thread and what transpired here to cause such bad blood, having entered so late into this conversation.

But I will tell you this much. This forum (Coffee Corner or any other) is what we make of it. If you (as in we all) use this forum as a means to "unwind", then the forum becomes that. If you chose to make this forum one where ideas and innovations are cultivated, then it becomes that. It is what we make of it. Reminds me of this famous [Bruce Lee video|http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USlnfTGlhXc ] (although the original comes from a movie).

Over the past 3 years, when a lot us started frequenting Coffee Corner it was then a place where you unwound and talk about things not restricting to SAP. So much so that some members were good humored-ly villified for talking SAP. The stricter moderation/weeding-out-noise/improving quality revolution started right here in Coffee Corner. When members started reporting threads that were in blatant violation of copyrights/points-gaming/link-farming, it brought into existance the Abuse Report Console.

When members started complaining about forum inefficiencies (here in Coffee Corner and in Suggestions and Comments forum), and lack of direction in addressing these issues, the Idea Place was brought into existance. This, in turn is one the reasons behind the much-anticipated Jive Migration.

When moderators complained about not having "enough hands" to tackle the noise, they were "heard" and provided additional hands.

True, there are threads here that can give "Bold and the Beautiful" a run for their money. But then the question to be asked is, why would you not want to have them here? Why can't they co-exist with the others? The forums are in a way a departmental store. My legs automatically take off in the Bed and Bath section and slow down near the Liquour section. Just because I dont like B&B doesnt mean I will ask the owners to get rid of that aisle.

And if I may point out, you yourself had come up with a Poetry thread to counter the Cricket thread a long time ago. Everybody has their own interest and they brought them here to look for like-minded people

Coming back to what I started with - the forum is what we make of it. Also, take this thread for example, it started with asking where has all the humour gone, to trashing Fun threads, to some moderated posts, to SAP bashing to politics and poetry.

Be water, my friend.

Thanks for taking the time to compose such a lengthy reply.

And you're absolutely right in one respect.

If folks here can tolerate me, I should be able to tolerate them, regardless of what we really think of each other.

But you're also wrong in one respect when you say "CC is what we make of it".

There shouldn't be any notion of "we" here, kishan.

IIf you look at the history of the world, you'll surely see that the notion of "we" has caused more problems than any other notion that humans have come up with.

Does the world really need yet another notion of "we"?

Why can't we just be a bunch of "I"s" who choose to intersect here - sometimes productively, sometimes not ?

Unfortunately, there is a simple answer to this rhetorical question - there are too many people who really don't want to try and become "I's".

Because being an "I" is a lot more scary than just being part of a big "we".

Think about it, kishan.

Be an "I", my friend.

Best

djh

All those I's go to make a stronger We. Both are needed. It's not one or the other. Being part of 'we' can be scary [as well|http://www.lyricsfreak.com/s/simonandgarfunkel/iama+rock_20124809.html]. As part of 'we', I have to change to accomdate others.

btw - here's a true [Tea Party. |http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmmE_h60rjk]

very interesting response, Matt.

The problem is the following.

Everyone knows the evils that arise from rampant egotism, i.e. the problem when "I's" get out of control. (Think the usual suspects - Hitler, Stalin, Mao, PolPot, the usual crew ...)

Far fewer recognize the evils that arise from unexamined "we-ism" - the assumption that there's something intrinsically beneficial about n > 2 people having something in common.

If you've never read it, please read Kurt Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle", with particular reference to his notions of "karass" and "granfalloon".

If SCN must be a "community" instead of a collection of "I's", then personally, I'd prefer it to be a "karass" and not a "granfalloon".

Best

djh

I could not disagree with you more David. IMO it is always the "I" that destroys the world. And it takes just one "I" to bring disrepute to the whole clan.

Your own example of Hitler is a case in point. It was a single "I" that caused such massive destruction and loss of millions of human lives and it was the collective "we" that fought against this tyranny.

Islam in itself is a sacred religion dating back thousands of years. But it is a single "I" in the form of Osama Bin Laden or a Mullah Omar that has brought disrepute and backlash to the entire religion.

A majority of Libyans are fighting a single "I" in the form of Muammar Gaddafi, Egyptians fought an "I" in Mubarak. The list is endless....

Now sit back for a while and remove all the mentioned I's from the picture. Imagine a world without these I's (with help from John Lennon ). Agreed, it still wont be a Utopia, but "we" would have fared better without these personalities. We are all jealous of the China success story. Have you ever heard of an "I" in China? No. It's a "we" that drives China. And a big one at that!!!

If we think about nothing but "I", then this world would choke itself to death with it's egoistic and egotistic occupants.

Coming back to the forums, a few years ago the forum was pretty much at the mercy of a million I's - I have a scenrio, please give me the code for the same. Vexed with these demanding lazy posters and egotistic contributors a select few declared war on these mercenaries. The result is in front of your eyes. Visit ABAP General forums(a case in point among others) once in a while and you would see the difference. No more Interview-type questions, no more how to configure MM module type questions, very few do-my-work posts(which not many venture to answer as they will be dealt with suitable and swiftly).

Had it not been for those distinguished few, we would still be lying in the dark ages.

And now in your defense you would quote greats like Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr, and many such illustrious I's that have changed the world. But please bear in mind they have become what they are because of the love and adoration of millions of people who believe in their ideology. Whereas in cases like Hitler and Gaddafi and Idi Amin and many others, it was the fear that held them loyal to these barbaric leaders. And that's a crucial factor you need to need to consider.

So, come join the "we" David

"I" and "we" is a matter of taste.

It is "them" and "you and all your..." which is a sure sign of a playground bully.

Cheers,

Julius

You seem to be laboring under two curious misapprehensions, Julius.

First, you seem to think that an implied ad hom is somehow no longer an ad hom.

Second, you don't seem to recognize that in a democracy, the majority is always a bully, BY DEFINITION.

Best as always

djh

In response, Kishan, I can only make the same suggestion I made to Matt earlier.

If you don't know the difference between a "karass" and a "granfalloon", read Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle".

If you do know the difference, perhaps you might consider when SCN functions as a "karass" and when it functions as a "granfalloon".

Best as always

djh

Kishan, you may be right, an 'I' can make a lot of damages, but usually it's because he/she meets a 'we' that supports him/her.

Masses like a charismatic leader, an 'I' who thinks for them and gives them a way to follow.

But if the charismatic 'I' meets other 'I', individuals arguing on everything, not inclined to follow the easier way, the damage can be limited ('What? Conquer Europe? U mad, come back painting the wall').

Well and truly said, federico.

Relative to SCN/SDN, there is also a more subtle point that can be made concerning "I's", "We's, and "true" vs "apparent" majorities.

If you look at the blogs on the front page of SCN/SDN, you would think that the "majority" of SAP's customer base has left the ECC 4.6c-6.0 code base far behind, and is now happily working on all kinds of interesting projects/problems involving the new products that SAP has layered on top of this hopelessly out-of-date code base.

But in fact, everyone knows that it is the ECC 4.6c-6.0 code base which provides the bulk of SAP's revenue stream, not the new layered products that flutter about the front-page of SCN/SDN like butterfiles newly released from their cocoons.

So if there is an "I" here (like "ME", for example), who consistently takes up the cause of those clients who must suffer with an unmodernized ECC (as well as the cause of those who realize that true SAP SOA is a pipe-dream without such a modernized code base), who is the true "majority" here at SCN/SDN?

The out-of-step "I" going against the grain and doing battle in out-of-the-way places like Coffee Corner for a true SAP SOA implementation based on a modernized ECC code base?

Or the fashionable "We" simply playing follow-the-leader on the front-page, whatever the latest buzzword from Walldorf?

Best

djh

Going off topic again, but I saw a vision of the future on Friday, and it was the BOL and it reminding me of some comments about the BOL I made earlier in this post.

Take care,

Stephen

Well, Stephen, if the Rapture will allow ECC clients to mix and match friendly modules instead of buying into SAP's wrapper transactions, then count me in.

Otherwise, in the words of the immortal Jim Morrison (The Doors: When the Music's Over):

Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection

Seriously, why not an SAP business-model built on a LEGGO concept - users license the core platform with no specific application functionality, and then license individual modules to build whatever they want to build? (When I say "modules", I don't mean like MM/PP/SD, etc - I mean specific packages (with classes, FGs etc) that provide specific SOA backend services ...)

Better than "cloud" by far ...

Best

djh

PS - in the new improved core code base, we could call the units "nodules" instead of "modules" - connoting higher granularity.

Edited by: David Halitsky on Jul 19, 2011 4:50 PM

You have a point (or looking at your post, many points).

Personally, I am quite busy moderating the ABAP forums, not much time left for other discussions. Also, in this role I'm being more careful with my replies, trying to be more "diplomatic", if you will.

Looking forward to reading comments about that trend and how to reverse it, maybe?

Thomas

You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.

Comment


> Personally, I am quite busy moderating the ABAP forums, not much time left for other discussions. Also, in this role I'm being more careful with my replies, trying to be more "diplomatic", if you will.

This i suppose is the flip side of being a moderator. You're no more fun

Ask a Question

Top Q&A Solution Author

User

Count