TM Note: "Don't mention other software" thread deleted

[Anonymous]

For the second time in as many days, I have elected to delete an entire
thread that has moved way off subject. I was typing a response (below)
and when I was done, numerous additional messages were added that could
only be described as childish. This is supposed to be a professional
forum - but threads like this one evolved into make me believe
otherwise.

I don't believe there is any intention on the part of the moderators to
prevent discussion of conversion from one product to another - this is a

way of life in most firms, either internally, or externally through
consultants, clients, or DOT's. Autodesk is not the only solution out
there but it IS the product that supports these forums and it IS why
most people come here - to get answers for their Autodesk based or
Autodesk related problem.

Where the line is crossed is when the discussion moves from on topic
discussion of the original thread subject to a diatribe on the various
products and which is better.

To wit, yet another salient response from a poster who has a chronically

tough time responding with anything that is on topic, of value to the
general thread, or is more than a terse statement of his undocumented
personal opinion:

"Where did you get that idea? Microstation is way better then Autocad by

far and much more user friendly."

-and-

"Are you real fat?"

This is typical of the type of responses that get deleted and endemic to
threads that get deleted.

Links to competitive software will, of course, be deleted - this is an
Autocad sponsored forum. Try hanging a Pepsi banner on Coca Cola HQ in
Atlanta and see what happens .

It is the goal of these newsgroups to provide peer to peer support for
Autodesk products. It is our job as moderators to make sure the content
of the discussion is about Autodesk products and how they can be used
more efficiently (including interaction with other data formats) -
proposing alternative software instead of providing an answer is a total

waste of keystroking - the posters (to add it) and the moderators (to
remove it).

As has been stated before, regular readers know who to listen to and who

to dismiss. A new reader, looking for valid information, does not have
the historical perspective that a regular reader does. This is why off
topic, non constructive, and non Adesk product related posts are
removed.

Most participants here appreciate that this is a moderated forum - they
can log in, post or get their answer with a minimum of drivel, and get
back to work. There's no spam, little chit chat, no obscenity, and most
threads are kept on topic. Those few who feel that this is offensive and

an infringement on their civil rights can go elsewhere and troll through

the requisite spams, off topic posts, foul language, etc. and
eventually decide what is relevant and what is not. This forum is
moderated and moderation entails following the guidelines - it's that
simple.


_____________
Karl M. Fuls PLS
AEC Training and Consulting
Assistant Moderator - Autodesk Discussion Forums

[Anonymous]

Hi Karl,

Just got through reading your statement re: the purpose of this newsgroup
and realized I may have committed or come close to committing a social faux
pas with a couple of recent posts of mine -

"Document Control Content Managers -Stellent?"

Mentioned software from another competing firm of Autodesks (not in a
deragotory or judgemental way in relation to Autodesk or itself) and did
relate some judgements about this software that is trying to interact with
Autodesk products that was not entirely rosy.

My apologies if I crossed the line here - if you could please read my posts
and remark about if I was getting too close to the line or over it for my
future reference I would appreciate it. It is not my intent to offend or get
involved in any dramas, here. This newsgroup has been a very, very good
friend and resource to me over the years and I would like to keep it that
way.

Thanks

Jim L.

[Anonymous]

Jeepers, you guys are walking on eggs now

TDMS software is no longer in the Autodesk stable (AFAIK) since the demise of
WorkCenter.

As I said in my other post, we're only concerned with blatant, outright
promotion of competing products and links to their websites. Other
design/drafting software exists out there and conversion to/from these products,
and the various problems that arise during the transfer, are all fair topics and
of importance to a lot of the participants. In the Land Desktop forums, there
are many third party products mentioned that work within and outside of LDT and
provide capabilities not found in the parent software. Land XML is a design data
transfer approach that Autodesk supports to allow design data from Land Desktop
(outside of the drawing proper) to be ported over to other applications. It's a
big big world out there and people use many different products to get to the
finish line.

Document Management is an important issue (or really should be with many firms)
and there are a lot of products out there. Which one suits your needs may
require a lot of research. When there is more involved than just a file (.dwg,
.doc, .xls, whatever) things get dicey real fast.

Three products that I am familiar with are:

CYCO Meridian
Synergis Adept
Columbus

but there are more out there. How well they deal with design files in addition
to drawing files will require some foot work on your part.

Land Desktop has it's own locking mechanism and to add another layer of locking
may be less that advisable. Rather that starting with a product and seeing if it
fits, lay out your precise needs and discuss it with someone who is familiar
with TDMS in general and is not married to a particular product. Buying the
software is usually just the start of a solid, dependable, unobtrusive document
management system. Get a good consultant, define your needs, and follow his/her
advice.

Good hunting.....

_____________
Karl M. Fuls PLS
AEC Training and Consulting
Assistant Moderator - Autodesk Discussion Forums


JAL wrote:

> Hi Karl,
>
> Just got through reading your statement re: the purpose of this newsgroup and
> realized I may have committed or come close to committing a social faux pas
> with a couple of recent posts of mine -
>
> "Document Control Content Managers -Stellent?"
>
> Mentioned software from another competing firm of Autodesks (not in a
> deragotory or judgemental way in relation to Autodesk or itself) and did
> relate some judgements about this software that is trying to interact with
> Autodesk products that was not entirely rosy.
>
> My apologies if I crossed the line here - if you could please read my posts
> and remark about if I was getting too close to the line or over it for my
> future reference I would appreciate it. It is not my intent to offend or get
> involved in any dramas, here. This newsgroup has been a very, very good
> friend and resource to me over the years and I would like to keep it that
> way.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jim L.

[Anonymous]

Rather walk on eggs than step in...$%^!!*



Thanks again.....good advice re: strategizing what you need DMS to do
before picking a product (although kind of preaching to the choir, here.),
now I just got to get the right people here to recognize this....hmmm, maybe
if it was framed as being their idea.....;)

Jim L.


"Karl Fuls" wrote in message
news:3EF24935.A936B72E@adelphia.net...
> Jeepers, you guys are walking on eggs now
>
> TDMS software is no longer in the Autodesk stable (AFAIK) since the demise
of
> WorkCenter.
>
> As I said in my other post, we're only concerned with blatant, outright
> promotion of competing products and links to their websites. Other
> design/drafting software exists out there and conversion to/from these
products,
> and the various problems that arise during the transfer, are all fair
topics and
> of importance to a lot of the participants. In the Land Desktop forums,
there
> are many third party products mentioned that work within and outside of
LDT and
> provide capabilities not found in the parent software. Land XML is a
design data
> transfer approach that Autodesk supports to allow design data from Land
Desktop
> (outside of the drawing proper) to be ported over to other applications.
It's a
> big big world out there and people use many different products to get to
the
> finish line.
>
> Document Management is an important issue (or really should be with many
firms)
> and there are a lot of products out there. Which one suits your needs may
> require a lot of research. When there is more involved than just a file
(.dwg,
> .doc, .xls, whatever) things get dicey real fast.
>
> Three products that I am familiar with are:
>
> CYCO Meridian
> Synergis Adept
> Columbus
>
> but there are more out there. How well they deal with design files in
addition
> to drawing files will require some foot work on your part.
>
> Land Desktop has it's own locking mechanism and to add another layer of
locking
> may be less that advisable. Rather that starting with a product and seeing
if it
> fits, lay out your precise needs and discuss it with someone who is
familiar
> with TDMS in general and is not married to a particular product. Buying
the
> software is usually just the start of a solid, dependable, unobtrusive
document
> management system. Get a good consultant, define your needs, and follow
his/her
> advice.
>
> Good hunting.....
>
> _____________
> Karl M. Fuls PLS
> AEC Training and Consulting
> Assistant Moderator - Autodesk Discussion Forums
>
>
> JAL wrote:
>
> > Hi Karl,
> >
> > Just got through reading your statement re: the purpose of this
newsgroup and
> > realized I may have committed or come close to committing a social faux
pas
> > with a couple of recent posts of mine -
> >
> > "Document Control Content Managers -Stellent?"
> >
> > Mentioned software from another competing firm of Autodesks (not in a
> > deragotory or judgemental way in relation to Autodesk or itself) and did
> > relate some judgements about this software that is trying to interact
with
> > Autodesk products that was not entirely rosy.
> >
> > My apologies if I crossed the line here - if you could please read my
posts
> > and remark about if I was getting too close to the line or over it for
my
> > future reference I would appreciate it. It is not my intent to offend or
get
> > involved in any dramas, here. This newsgroup has been a very, very good
> > friend and resource to me over the years and I would like to keep it
that
> > way.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jim L.
>
>
>

[Anonymous]

don't worry, the only people you made upset was autodesk. Most people here actually want to hear about other products

"JAL"
|>Hi Karl,
|>
|>Just got through reading your statement re: the purpose of this newsgroup
|>and realized I may have committed or come close to committing a social faux
|>pas with a couple of recent posts of mine -
|>
|>"Document Control Content Managers -Stellent?"
|>
|>Mentioned software from another competing firm of Autodesks (not in a
|>deragotory or judgemental way in relation to Autodesk or itself) and did
|>relate some judgements about this software that is trying to interact with
|>Autodesk products that was not entirely rosy.
|>
|>My apologies if I crossed the line here - if you could please read my posts
|>and remark about if I was getting too close to the line or over it for my
|>future reference I would appreciate it. It is not my intent to offend or get
|>involved in any dramas, here. This newsgroup has been a very, very good
|>friend and resource to me over the years and I would like to keep it that
|>way.
|>
|>Thanks
|>
|>Jim L.
|>

[Anonymous]

While posting on AutoDesk sponsored groups, we follow AutoDesk rules.
Discussion about other software products should be done elseware.

--

Chip Harper
Member of the AutoDesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program

[Anonymous]

Hello Chip,

Didn't really want to get into any dramas here, but I thought I was ok until
your post...I believe I did comply with the spirit of what I perceive the
rules and prevailing attitudes are for these forums - it appears from Karl
Fuls response that he concurs...however your post says differently.
Are you guys just individually making this up as you go along? Are these
"Autodesk rules" formally posted anywhere so I can determine on my own what
is appropriate? It seems pretty ambiguous between the moderators what is or
isn't acceptable.

JAL

"Chip Harper" wrote in message
news:1126C5E15C917C49B574FF9592512F17@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> While posting on AutoDesk sponsored groups, we follow AutoDesk rules.
> Discussion about other software products should be done elseware.
>
> --
>
> Chip Harper
> Member of the AutoDesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program
>
>

[Anonymous]

I agree, JAL.

There are many legitimate things to discuss about when it concerns the
software of competitors. Discussing functionality as it compares to
Autodesk, ease of use, installation issues, and related points are things
that SHOULD be allowed here for discussion. After all, it is a real concern
for CAD managers.

Autodesk would merely be shooting themselves in the foot if they disallowed
any discussion about competitor's products. Let the discussion through as
long as it doesn't degenerate into a flame or bashing.

Corwin Holder
Agri-Fab, Inc.


"JAL" wrote in message
news:6BCE23FA2AB7914FC6C4E8AC14C0BB57@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Hello Chip,
>
> Didn't really want to get into any dramas here, but I thought I was ok
until
> your post...I believe I did comply with the spirit of what I perceive the
> rules and prevailing attitudes are for these forums - it appears from Karl
> Fuls response that he concurs...however your post says differently.
> Are you guys just individually making this up as you go along? Are these
> "Autodesk rules" formally posted anywhere so I can determine on my own
what
> is appropriate? It seems pretty ambiguous between the moderators what is
or
> isn't acceptable.
>

[Anonymous]

The rules are posted at http://discussion.autodesk.com/webx?groundrules .
Moderators have a seperate forum where we can post "which side of the line
does this fall on?" questions. Once we get a ruling, we enforce them.
Basicly if the product is an enhancement to AutoCAD then it's ok. If it's
considered a competing product or if AutoDesk deems the enhancement product
was created in such a manner that it violates AutoDesk licensing rules then
it's not allowed. Bottom line is it's AutoDesks sandbox and their rules. If
an individual (this is not directed to anyone in specific, but any that this
would apply to) feels it's unjust they should post eslewhere. Personally
speaking, I don't always agree with every decision that comes our way, but I
respect their right to make the decision and I abide by it.

And if your wondering I do not weld the power to remove posts. If I see
something that I feel needs to be removed, I have to submit it up the line
for action.


--

Chip Harper
Member of the AutoDesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program

[Anonymous]

I don't think anyone would disagree with the statement its autodesk server so they make the rules. That is not the
issue. The issue here is that this forum has the most people using it so you are going to get the best cross section of
opinions out there. I would love to jump to another location to discuss non autodesk products, but the fact of the
matter is, that all the autodesk product experts are here. What good is it to talk on some other server if there is a
limited number of people particularizing. Autodesk's dictator type policies are getting tiresome. What is autodesk
afraid of. That some better product will come along and they will lose sales? Do they really think that talking about
another product is going to hurt autodesk? Come on, give us a break. We are married to autodesk. No one ever got
fired for buying autodesk. Now I believe that knowing about other products strong points can only help autodesk make
superior products. IF they would listen, but that is another discussion.


"Chip Harper"
|>The rules are posted at http://discussion.autodesk.com/webx?groundrules .
|>Moderators have a seperate forum where we can post "which side of the line
|>does this fall on?" questions. Once we get a ruling, we enforce them.
|>Basicly if the product is an enhancement to AutoCAD then it's ok. If it's
|>considered a competing product or if AutoDesk deems the enhancement product
|>was created in such a manner that it violates AutoDesk licensing rules then
|>it's not allowed. Bottom line is it's AutoDesks sandbox and their rules. If
|>an individual (this is not directed to anyone in specific, but any that this
|>would apply to) feels it's unjust they should post eslewhere. Personally
|>speaking, I don't always agree with every decision that comes our way, but I
|>respect their right to make the decision and I abide by it.
|>
|>And if your wondering I do not weld the power to remove posts. If I see
|>something that I feel needs to be removed, I have to submit it up the line
|>for action.

[Anonymous]

Dave-

< is autodesk
afraid of. That some better product will come along and they
will lose sales? >>

You are welcome to post elsewhere or even (GASP!) post with a
real email address.

Yes the posts that come in and say buy XYZ product at XYZ.com are
going to be removed. Why should Autodesk pay for and host
discussion groups where sales pitches for other products are
allowed to stay? See Chip's post for how we decide on what goes
and what stays. If it can replace an Autodesk product, it's gone.

Anne
--
Anne Brown
Manager, Moderator
Autodesk Product Support Discussion Groups
Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion

Dave Lewis wrote:
>
> I don't think anyone would disagree with the statement its autodesk server so they make the rules. That is not the
> issue. The issue here is that this forum has the most people using it so you are going to get the best cross section of opinions out there.

[Anonymous]

Hi Anne,

I'm still confused as to what seems to be apparently different perceptions,
rationalizations, whatever....of Autodesks policy from the moderators of
this group. All I asked for was guidance on what I had posted previously.
Karl Fuls seems to think its ok and I'm walking on eggs trying not to be
offensive. However, Chip Harper flatly states,

"Discussion about other software products should be done elseware."

Autodesks written policy says :

"Messages discussing other software packages (not Autodesk related) may be
removed at the moderator's discretion. "

My posts were explicitly concerned with the other softwares inability to
interact with AutoCAD and Land Development and other CAD packages.

I know I'm not the brightest bulb on the block, however this seems to be
completely within the inference given within the rules since the topic was
Autodesk product related....yet Chip flatly states that needs to be done
"elseware" (sp). I hope you can see and understand my confusion on the
apparently 2 different positions taken by the moderator staff on this. I
know you have been a long time moderator on the discussion groups and seen
it all, so I will defer to your opinion and shutup - enough said from
me.....

Thanks for listenin'

Jim L.

"Anne Brown" wrote in message
news:3EF8DCA9.2DFC6265@autodesk.com...
> Dave-
>
> < > is autodesk
> afraid of. That some better product will come along and they
> will lose sales? >>
>
> You are welcome to post elsewhere or even (GASP!) post with a
> real email address.
>
> Yes the posts that come in and say buy XYZ product at XYZ.com are
> going to be removed. Why should Autodesk pay for and host
> discussion groups where sales pitches for other products are
> allowed to stay? See Chip's post for how we decide on what goes
> and what stays. If it can replace an Autodesk product, it's gone.
>
> Anne
> --
> Anne Brown
> Manager, Moderator
> Autodesk Product Support Discussion Groups
> Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion
>
> Dave Lewis wrote:
> >
> > I don't think anyone would disagree with the statement its autodesk
server so they make the rules. That is not the
> > issue. The issue here is that this forum has the most people using it
so you are going to get the best cross section of opinions out there.

[Anonymous]

Chip said "If it's considered a competing product or if AutoDesk
deems the enhancement product was created in such a manner that
it violates AutoDesk licensing rules then it's not allowed."

Last night I answered another user with " Yes the posts that come
in and say buy XYZ product at XYZ.com are going to be removed.
Why should Autodesk pay for and host discussion groups where
sales pitches for other products are
allowed to stay? See Chip's post for how we decide on what goes
and what stays. If it can replace an Autodesk product, it's gone.
"

The bottom line for the moderators is if a discussion would lead
a user to go purchase another product than the Autodesk one being
discussed.

Does that help? It's rare a message is removed. It's just those
that are attempting to or seeming to move users into other
competing products.

Anne
--
Anne Brown
Manager, Moderator
Autodesk Product Support Discussion Groups
Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion

JAL wrote:
>
> Hi Anne,
>
> I'm still confused as to what seems to be apparently different perceptions,
> rationalizations,

[Anonymous]

OMG "a read email address" what would be the benefit of that?
What would be the downsize, how about more spam in my box.
People who need to email me already know my email address, in
fact I got an email from Terry about an hour ago.

What then is the pn.classifieds group for? There is advertisements
that say buy this or that product. Why should Autodesk pay for and
host? I don't think anyone is asking for autodesk to host a microstation
group or a solidedge group. But there is nothing wrong with saying that
microstation or solidedge has superior features that we wish autodesk
products could do. Sometimes we even have to work with those other
products. Everyone wants the best possible support from their peers and
this is the best place to get it. Of course its not the place to market a
competing product, but the censorship that takes place is tiresome. I
cannot even use the proper language to describe it because I would
just get censored.


Anne Brown
|>< |>is autodesk
|>afraid of. That some better product will come along and they
|>will lose sales? >>
|>
|>You are welcome to post elsewhere or even (GASP!) post with a
|>real email address.
|>
|>Yes the posts that come in and say buy XYZ product at XYZ.com are
|>going to be removed. Why should Autodesk pay for and host
|>discussion groups where sales pitches for other products are
|>allowed to stay? See Chip's post for how we decide on what goes
|>and what stays. If it can replace an Autodesk product, it's gone.

[Anonymous]

"Dave Lewis" wrote in message
news:q9hjfvcl663meoq97rjgf75h1gbsebvn5s@4ax.com...

Sheesh, get over yourself already. Just come here, use this for the
productive tool it is and follow the rules. Simple.

[Anonymous]

If you have features that you would like to see added to any of the Autodesk
products the venue for that type of request has always been the "Wish List"
site which is part of AUGI's web site:

http://www.augiwishlist.com/home.cfm

**************************************************************
Please, DO NOT send technical requests to me via private e-mail
**************************************************************

Tracy W. Lincoln
Assistant Moderator - Autodesk Discussion Forums

Discussion Group Links:
-----------------------
Index: http://discussion.autodesk.com
Rules: http://discussion.autodesk.com/webx?groundrules

[Anonymous]

Thanks Anne,

Perhaps I was taking Chips original statement re: discussion about other
software products too literally. As I understand it now, with the other
qualifiers added, the policies make reasonable sense to me. There are other
alt. newsgroups if people wish to carry things to a different level.

Jim L.

"Anne Brown" wrote in message
news:3EF9BD04.10109B41@autodesk.com...
> Chip said "If it's considered a competing product or if AutoDesk
> deems the enhancement product was created in such a manner that
> it violates AutoDesk licensing rules then it's not allowed."
>
> Last night I answered another user with " Yes the posts that come
> in and say buy XYZ product at XYZ.com are going to be removed.
> Why should Autodesk pay for and host discussion groups where
> sales pitches for other products are
> allowed to stay? See Chip's post for how we decide on what goes
> and what stays. If it can replace an Autodesk product, it's gone.
> "
>
> The bottom line for the moderators is if a discussion would lead
> a user to go purchase another product than the Autodesk one being
> discussed.
>
> Does that help? It's rare a message is removed. It's just those
> that are attempting to or seeming to move users into other
> competing products.
>
> Anne
> --
> Anne Brown
> Manager, Moderator
> Autodesk Product Support Discussion Groups
> Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion
>
> JAL wrote:
> >
> > Hi Anne,
> >
> > I'm still confused as to what seems to be apparently different
perceptions,
> > rationalizations,

[Anonymous]

If the statement below is true, then why was my reference to a free product
of a competing manufacturer deleted? All I was doing was pointing out a way
to convert said products files to a format Inventor could open, which it
currently can not do.

Karl Fuls wrote in message
news:3EF24935.A936B72E@adelphia.net...
|
| As I said in my other post, we're only concerned with blatant, outright
| promotion of competing products and links to their websites. Other
| design/drafting software exists out there and conversion to/from these
products,
| and the various problems that arise during the transfer, are all fair
topics and
| of importance to a lot of the participants.

[Anonymous]

Jerry -

This product is constantly under debate in the moderator section.
The key is just what you said "a free product of a competing
manufacture". It is a competitor. We will discuss this with the
Inventor product manager.
--
Anne Brown
Manager, Moderator
Autodesk Product Support Discussion Groups
Discussion Q&A: http://www.autodesk.com/discussion


Jerry wrote:
>
> If the statement below is true, then why was my reference to a free product
> of a competing manufacturer deleted? All I was doing was pointing out a way
> to convert said products files to a format Inventor could open, which it
> currently can not do.