Why is a French Spellchecker a "required" update for English speak

['69 Camaro]

Hi, Charlie.

Well let me remind you of your earlier dumbass and completely worthless
comment shall I?

Being seated behind the veil of the Internet occasionally allows one to
write that which one would never say to a person in a public gathering.
There is no doubt in my mind that if you were standing in the same room with
me, you would never utter these words. You've admitted several times that
you are not famililar with either MS Office or Access, and that you are
looking for guidance or discussion from more experienced folks in these
areas. Perhaps you'll be offered that guidance if you spend more time
listening instead offering inflammatory remarks.

Without a physical presence while using the Internet, the only thing one has
in a technical discussion group is a reputation. The statements made by
some folks weigh heavier than the statements made by other folks, due to
those reputations. When there's a difference of opinion, people tend to
believe the one with a reputation as a straight shooter before they'll
believe the one with a reputation of shooting wildly from the hip.

Consider how much weight people will attribute to your inflammatory
statement pasted above that comes from the judgement of someone who admits
he is not familiar with MS Office or Access. Essentially, you can build a
reputation for intelligent discourse, or you can build a reputation for
hot-headedness that only serves to undermine the perceived veracity of the
information you offer afterwards. It's your choice.

the problem is not SPECIFIC to Access

Correct. Your problem with Office Update failing unless the French
Spell-checker is installed first is not a topic that logically comes under
the umbrella of this newsgroup, which covers discussions specific to Access,
the database application. This newsgroup isn't named
Microsoft.Public.AccessAndOfficeUpdate nor
Microsoft.Public.AccessAndMSOffice because there's no reason to join these
multiple subjects, especially since Office Update and Microsoft Office have
their own separate newsgroups to discuss topics germane to those subjects.

You disagree with this since Access can launch Office Update, just like
other applications in the MS Office Suite. You'll find that this opinion is
in the minority within the group of people who spend time answering
questions in this newsgroup.

Why do I mention this particular group? Because these are the people who
decide which questions they can and want to answer. These are very generous
people who offer their expertise to those in need -- without any
compensation -- and know their own abilities, so they're the best qualified
to make the decision on which questions get answered -- or not.

When some of these people reply to a poster that the question would better
be posted in a different newsgroup more relevant to the question, it's
because they are aware of the skill sets available from the experts who
regularly hang around this newsgroup, and the question isn't one that would
normally fall within those skill sets. It's presumptuous of you to insist
that these people don't know the skill sets available of the regulars who
hang out in this newsgroup when you, yourself, only arrived quite recently.
You only started posting to the Access newsgroups five days prior to the
start of this discussion thread, yet you somehow know that the Access
newsgroup experts will answer questions that many certified Windows system
administrators and Microsoft Office professionals have a hard time handling
unless also experienced in Office configuration problems, too? If they've
got those skills, then they should be compensated at the consultant's going
rate, because it takes time away from what they'd rather be doing:
troubleshooting and offering their own brilliant solutions in Access.

therefore it IS of potential interest to Office users who only use
selected parts of the suite.

If you have a topic that you think is of potential interest to other MS
Office users, then consider posting a message in an Office newsgroup, not in
the Access newsgroup, because Access probably has the smallest audience of
all of the applications in the MS Office Suite. Consider this based upon
the fact that none of the other popular editions of Office (Standard
Edition, Small Business Edition, and Teachers and Students Edition) contain
Access. Only the MS Office Pro Edition does.

One of the greatest benefits of the newsgroups is that these messages can be
archived and searched for solutions to previous questions. If a researcher
finds that Office Update fails when the French Spell-checker isn't
installed, then the first place a knowledgeable researcher will look is the
archived Microsoft.Public.OfficeUpdate newsgroup. Since this question has
not yet been asked there, the researcher might assume that it's an uncommon
problem and give up the search, or else expand the search to all Office
newsgroups. If your discussion thread on this topic were archived in an
Access newsgroup and found there after such a search, then one can easily
imagine the following statement: "Excellent hiding place! I _never_ would
have looked there!"

It seems a little pointless to appoint yourself as an authority on a piece
of software

Geez! I forgot that step. Thanks for reminding me.

"By the power invested in me by the Governator of the Great State of
California, I hereby grant Gunny the coveted title, 'Authority on a Piece of
Software,' with all rights and privileges conferred therefrom." (Please
save your applause till the end of the speech. Thank you.)

yet attack anyone who brings in peripheral information

You haven't been attacked. You've been told that your problem with another
application isn't a relevant topic in the Access newsgroup, and that
information you suggested as a possible remedial action to the problem you
encountered with Office Update would result in additional work for anyone
implementing your suggested remedy. At most, you've found that someone
disagrees with your assertions and is willing to say so. It's nothing to
lose any sleep over.

which may well affect your own specialty subject does it not?

Your information has no effect on any of my specialty subjects, which are
Oracle, aerospace, and weapons systems. (And possibly Harry Potter, but
that's my favorite nieces' and nephews' faults. It's not like I have any
formal training it that arena.) None of these subjects depend upon Office
Update, MS Office, or even Windows, for that matter.

Of course if you prefer the role of self appointed newsgroup cop then I
suppose it's just perfect, in fact why bother dealing with any software
specific queries at all?

I offer my assistance and advice where needed, and while that's usually
answering technical questions, sometimes that's to inform lost souls that
they aren't where they though they were. However, my advice to you is to
calm down, because you're reacting to mere disagreements from others as if
they were personal attacks.

Why not simply be Newsgroup re-director and have done with it? Save
yourself some time and some typing.

Awesome! Is this a paid position? And does it have medical benefits?
What's the company policy on moonlighting? And is it okay if I telecommute
from the pool?

(Note to self: First order of business is for the users landing in the
Microsoft Office Discussion Groups Web page who are coming directly from the
link in the Microsoft Office applications other than Access. These users
will be redirected to Larry Ellison's personal home page. They'll never
make _that_ mistake again!)

HTH.

Gunny

 

[Stephen Lebans]

Hi Charlie!
Bye Charlie!
PLONK!

Stephen Lebans
http://www.lebans.com
Access Code, Tips and Tricks
Please respond only to the newsgroups so everyone can benefit.

 

[Charlie Tame]

message
More repetetive verbage removed - do you have software to re-hash the same
worn comments over and over?

You disagree with this since Access can launch Office Update, just like
other applications in the MS Office Suite. You'll find that this opinion
is in the minority within the group of people who spend time answering
questions in this newsgroup.

I did not disagree, I merely wondered if the fact that when launching from
within Access the program itself is running might be a possible cause. Once
again MS advise shutting down most programs during updates and Access is a
program...

Why do I mention this particular group? Because these are the people who
decide which questions they can and want to answer. These are very
generous people who offer their expertise to those in need -- without any
compensation -- and know their own abilities, so they're the best
qualified to make the decision on which questions get answered -- or not.

I am well aware of the efforts made by genuine MVPs who wish to assist, I am
also aware of a few spurious self appointed authorities who wish to amplify
their self importance, avail everyone who is not even remotely interested of
their vast and authoritative knowledge and chastise or belittle anyone who
questions their motives, but you are still wrong. The problems with the
update site could well cause some Access users a few problems. For solutions
to the "Usual" problems the MS sites and help files are usually enough, but
for unusual or rare problems newsgroups can be far more valuable. Frankly I
don't see that we disagree too much about the "Unusual" nature of some
problems and I suspect we also would have to agree that problems which an
expert could fix easily can become fatal if a less familiar user starts off
with the wrong diagnosis or applies the wrong fix. I accept that I first
failed to point out exactly WHY I was concerned that the launch with Access
actually running "seemed like" a possibility, but I would suggest that a
simple "I think it's unlikely that Access caused it" would have done instead
of the tirade aimed at the original poster (which if you remember was not
me).

As to your second paragraph, well read it again and see what you actually
said. Why did YOU choose to answer when you felt the question was not
relevant to Access?

My concern, even as a newcomer to Access (Relatively speaking) was simply to
ask the question so that others would be aware of a situation which, by your
own admission, might be quite rare. It is by no means impossible that we
have both misunderstood each other's motives from the start, however whilst
I am making every effort to see your point of view, particularly given the
awkward naming convention of the group, you seem determined to pursue this
systematic ridicule as far as you possibly can.

Now, as far as newsgroup etiquette goes I had searched what I had downloaded
from the group and found no solution (or nothing sounding very like) my
experience until the OP popped up with the French Grammar checker post which
did sound very familiar. Considering that his post sounded as though it was
half intended to be humorous and considering that Access is part of a suite
that just "Might" be relevant I saw little harm in it and responded, that is
ALL that happened. Nobody lost any money, nobody died, 2 people got their
pride dented. Life is like that sometimes. It doesn't really matter whether
we argue or whether anybody eventually wins, I'm sure we both have better
things to do.

Charlie

 

['69 Camaro]

Hi, Charlie.

You obviously need to have the last word in every conversation, and I hate
to take that away from you, but as the "Authority on a Piece of Software," I
have a duty to perform, and then you can have as many last words as your
heart desires.

"By the power vested in me as the 'Authority on a Piece of Software,' I
hereby grant Charlie Tame the privilege of understanding all of the
following:

1.) That Charlie Tame requiring members of the Access newsgroup community
to have the genuine MVP title before their posts carry any weight is not
realistic.

2.) That Charlie Tame is not an MVP.

3.) That many of the contributors to the Access newsgroup community are
not MVP's, either.

4.) That lack of an MVP title doesn't immediately invalidate information
contributed from Access newsgroup community members, nor preclude these
members from taking the initiative to let new arrivals know that a post is
likely to be better addressed in a more appropriate newsgroup, nor prevent
these members from clarifying information whenever the poster is unclear on
a concept.

http://www.2dorks.com/video/car_trailer.wmv
(Requires speakers.)

5.) That any off-topic question can be responded to with replies that
indicate the question would be better answered in a different newsgroup,
followed by replies that answer the question. As always, the contributors
who answer questions decide which questions get answered, and the Access
newsgroup community isn't shy about posting answers even if someone has
previously explained that the question has been posted in the wrong
newsgroup.

6.) That any information posted will be read by multiple members of the
Access newsgroup community, and any necessary corrections or clarifications
about Access topics will be made by the first Access experts who notice the
need for a correction or clarification. Some of these experts may have the
MVP title. Some may not. Any information posted about non-Access topics is
in the caveat emptor category.

7.) That any posted topic not answered means that the topic didn't make
the cut for which questions get selected to be answered by the Access
newsgroup community. (Replies don't necessarily indicate that any of the
responses are answers.) These folks, even the non-MVP's, are experienced
enough to know when it's best to stay well clear, so insisting otherwise may
not be wise.

http://www.2dorks.com/video/truck_stand.wmv
(Requires speakers.)

8.) That any poster's behavior will be observed by participants and
non-participants alike in a discussion thread.

9.) That, as Ann Landers has said, "The true measure of a man is how he
treats someone who can do him absolutely no good," and it's evident who
Charlie Tame believes can do him no good.

10.) That Stephen Lebans, one of the most knowledgeable Access experts to
be found and a long-time Access MVP, has measured Charlie Tame at "PLONK!"
level.

11.) That if Charlie Tame needs help in the future with advanced Access
topics and Stephen Lebans's extraordinary and unique talents, Charlie Tame
is SOL.

12.) That if Charlie Tame finds that his future Access questions aren't
answered on a timely basis when others' are, it may very well be because the
Access experts have decided a more productive and rewarding use of their
time is to provide guidance to others in need, even if it's this guy:

http://www.wagenschenke.ch
(Requires speakers.)

Or providing their creative genius in other areas, such as guidance systems:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?F2C1324FA
(Requires speakers.)

13.) That Babelfish can be used to translate words and short phrases in
common foreign languages to verify whether or not they meet a prudent man's
definition of a tirade:

http://babelfish.altavista.com

Or whether someone is having a practical joke at one's expense:

http://www.2dorks.com/video/japanese.wmv
(Requires speakers.)

14.) That Office Update is capable of updating all of the Office
applications at once for a given version installed on the computer. There's
no need to run Office Update for each separate application to get the
patches for that particular application right after running it from the
first application.

15.) That if one is concerned about any applications running in the
background while updates are being installed, then these applications,
including the Office application used to launch Office Update, can be
closed -- and even anti-virus auto-protect software disabled -- prior to
selecting the "Install" or "I Accept" buttons and initiating the
installation of the updates."

You may choose to exercise this privilege. Or not. But go ahead and post
all of the last words you want, Charlie. I've done my duty, so I'm
elsewhere providing and receiving guidance.

Arrivederci.

Gunny, the Authority on a Piece of Software ;-)