Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase ««123»»

Replication Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 8:47 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:40 AM
Points: 2,327, Visits: 2,656
timfle (12/29/2009)
poorly written question, misspelled words
grammar incorrect

does anyone read the questions before they are posted?

OH - now I understand - the proof reading is outsourced to a foreign country where they speak fractured english


To be fair, I don't think it's always people from foreign countries (i.e., not America) who post questions with fractured English. Too many Americans can't write coherently, either. But this is an English-language site, so regardless of the nation of origin, those who post questions should get them reviewed for correctness.

- webrunner


-------------------
"Operator! Give me the number for 911!" - Homer Simpson

"A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and says 'Can I join you?'"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
Post #839875
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 9:36 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, July 14, 2014 9:47 AM
Points: 2,919, Visits: 2,525
To be fair


We must remember that many people from many countries and cultures post here and we (Americans/English speaking majority) shouold not want to discourage anyone because of their grammer. Some languages place verbs in funny places to our way of thinking. We should conduct ourselves in a professional and courteous fashion throughout.

I put the blame with the editors who recieve the proposed QOD, and then review it. After they have reviewed it they notify the submitter of when it wil be scheduled. I have to assume that they get flooded with QOD's daily and I would venture that they can't give each question an in depth test. But sometimes, like this one, the problems just seem to jump out at you.

IMHO - I personally think that comments such as:

OH - now I understand - the proof reading is outsourced to a foreign country where they speak fractured english


have absolutely no business on here. How many of us have had to work with people who speak english as a second or even third language? Remember, we may get frustrated with their speech patterns, but they too get frustrated when we answer them because they may not always understand at first.


Steve Jimmo
Sr DBA
“If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
Post #839893
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 10:27 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:40 AM
Points: 2,327, Visits: 2,656
sjimmo (12/29/2009)
To be fair


We must remember that many people from many countries and cultures post here and we (Americans/English speaking majority) shouold not want to discourage anyone because of their grammer. Some languages place verbs in funny places to our way of thinking. We should conduct ourselves in a professional and courteous fashion throughout.

I put the blame with the editors who recieve the proposed QOD, and then review it. After they have reviewed it they notify the submitter of when it wil be scheduled. I have to assume that they get flooded with QOD's daily and I would venture that they can't give each question an in depth test. But sometimes, like this one, the problems just seem to jump out at you.


I mostly agree, but in the case of a technical site, even though one can forgive a few minor errors (spelling, etc.), once the grammar becomes a bigger problem, it is sometimes impossible to know what is even being asked, or what information is relevant. For a SQL question, that can make it impossible and even unfair as a question. There should be a process for the person submitting the question to ensure that it is understandable in English. If the person has access to an English-speaking proofreader prior to submitting the question, that's great. But I think there should be some review of the grammar on SSC itself, prior to publishing the question. I realize, though, that that may be more work than SSC can support at the moment. But it should be on the list of things to implement.


IMHO - I personally think that comments such as:

OH - now I understand - the proof reading is outsourced to a foreign country where they speak fractured english


have absolutely no business on here. How many of us have had to work with people who speak english as a second or even third language? Remember, we may get frustrated with their speech patterns, but they too get frustrated when we answer them because they may not always understand at first.


I completely agree. That's why I posted my first comment. Even if the original comment correctly states that some non-native speakers of English post poorly worded questions, they are not the only ones with the problem. As I said, a lot of supposedly native English speakers have trouble writing with proper grammar and intelligibility. We are all in this together, and to make the QOTD fun, it has to have well-written questions, no matter who is doing the writing. Comments such as the "the proof reading is outsourced to a foreign country..." are not helpful in reaching that goal.

- webrunner


-------------------
"Operator! Give me the number for 911!" - Homer Simpson

"A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and says 'Can I join you?'"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
Post #839931
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 12:15 PM
SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, January 11, 2013 8:20 AM
Points: 1,608, Visits: 373
Got it wrong as well, as I found a third way to interpret the QotD:
We have server ABC and installed two instance on it ABC\First and ABC\Second. we setup the Transactional replication from ABC to ABC\first. after 1 week we installed instance ABC\Second(control panel\add remove program\... unstall ABC\Second).
I thought of a replication between ABC (default instance) and ABC\First, and a reinstallation of ABC\Second. And nothing should happen in this case, should it?

Regarding the language difficulties issue: I am Austrian, thus English is a second language to me. I have been lucky to get an excellent education at high school which prepared me for my career. English is a minor problem for me, but a major for many of my friends and colleagues.
Working in a multinational bank with subsidiaries in many Slavic countries English is our working language, and sometimes it is fun to hear and see what people are talking and writing. Nevertheless I could hardly imagine anyone I know would dare publishing a text like this QotD in a forum read by thousands of people. Those who are not capable to do it better just know about their troubles with the foreign language and would look for help. The result may be imperfect but comprehensible.
Nevertheless, mocking others neither helps any author lacking language capabilities nor us to understand the question. It is not a funny joke, it is just bad manners. Maybe I am a bit oversensitive here, but looking some time back in history some Herrenmenschen started their political career by humiliating and mocking others. Respect is a necessary foundation for effective communication. Lacking respect leads to quarrels in the better case and to wars in the worse.



Best regards,
Dietmar Weickert.
Post #840005
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 12:40 PM


SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 8:44 PM
Points: 1,520, Visits: 739
I apologize for my english. I was in hurry while posting the QOD, the only thing I would like to share was my experience on replication that when we uninstall the named instance on the server (irrespective of that instance is involved into replication or not) replication on that server will fail.

It should be like this"
We have server ABC and installed two instance on it ABC\First and ABC\Second. we setup the Transactional replication from ABC (Default) to ABC\First. after 1 week we UNinstalled instance ABC\Second(control panel\add remove program\... UNINstall ABC\Second).
even ABC\Second is not involved in replication the replication between default instance and ABC\First will failed) --- Also this I tested on Sql server 2000"

This is very interesting stuff I observed and would like to share.... but everybody was laughing on my english....


I blog for the same :
http://vinay-thakur.spaces.live.com/default.aspx?_c01_BlogPart=blogentry&_c=BlogPart&handle=cns!645E3FC14D5130F2!229

I learned a lot on QOD so want to contribute my one cent.

I agree that my english is not so good.


Thanx.
Vinay


http://rdbmsexperts.com/Blogs/
http://vinay-thakur.spaces.live.com/
http://twitter.com/ThakurVinay
Post #840017
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 12:51 PM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:40 AM
Points: 2,327, Visits: 2,656
Vinay Thakur-585143 (12/29/2009)
I apologize for my english. I was in hurry while posting the QOD, the only thing I would like to share was my experience on replication that when we uninstall the named instance on the server (irrespective of that instance in involved into replication or not) replication on that server will fail.

It should be like this"
We have server ABC and installed two instance on it ABC\First and ABC\Second. we setup the Transactional replication from ABC (Default) to ABC\First. after 1 week we UNinstalled instance ABC\Second(control panel\add remove program\... UNINstall ABC\Second).
even ABC\Second is not involved in replication the replication between default instance and ABC\First will failed) --- Also this I tested on Sql server 2000"

This is very interesting stuff I observed and would like to share.... but everybody was laughing on my english....


I blog for the same :
http://vinay-thakur.spaces.live.com/default.aspx?_c01_BlogPart=blogentry&_c=BlogPart&handle=cns!645E3FC14D5130F2!229

I learned a lot on QOD so want to contribute my one cent.

I agree that my english is not so good.




Hello, Vinay,

Thank you for the clarification. I'm sorry you had to have people mocking your English. The question should have been phrased better, but regardless of any trouble anyone had in reading the question, that was no excuse for comments that insult or mock you. Several other members have written expressing the same sentiment, so I hope you won't be discouraged from posting future questions due to a few mocking comments.

My original comment (that I couldn't even hazard a guess for the answer from the question) was not intended as mockery of you (in fact I was mocking myself), but now that I have seen the other comments and read your comment in particular, I apologize personally if I unintentionally insulted you.

Sincerely,
webrunner


-------------------
"Operator! Give me the number for 911!" - Homer Simpson

"A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and says 'Can I join you?'"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
Post #840022
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 5:31 PM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:47 PM
Points: 370, Visits: 175
Need to do ENGLISH Honors before I can understand the question properly. Anyway I understood my way and the answer was WRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG ...!!! Its my height of stupidity for attempting at this question

Thanks for reading
Post #840135
Posted Tuesday, December 29, 2009 8:03 PM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 9:33 AM
Points: 33,052, Visits: 15,162
The grammar has been corrected. Apologies for any issues.

I will also award back points for this question.







Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #840155
Posted Wednesday, December 30, 2009 2:38 AM
Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 8:28 AM
Points: 1,206, Visits: 2,195
I have to admit that even now I understand the full question, I would still have got it wrong . As Vinay says, this is very surprising behaviour.
Post #840228
Posted Wednesday, December 30, 2009 7:09 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 7:48 AM
Points: 2,512, Visits: 3,697
OK. Now that the fireworks has subsided... Shame on anyone who makes fun of someone's English proficiency. How many of you would be proficient in their language on a like forum?

I'm putting away my shaking finger now.

Is this a bug in SQL Server? Why would an instance that is not part of replication cause this behavior when removed?
Post #840291
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase ««123»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse