Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- From: Frank Hamersley <terabitemightbe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 12:49:49 GMT
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
On Mon, 08 May 2006 08:02:42 GMT, Frank HamersleyBob Badour wrote:jiiiiim@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:You *are* simply a dullard of the first order - of course I used a second email address given you had dumped the first in your killfile. My standards of etiquette required bringing the above post to your attention before handing you "the white feather" for having deserted the original thread line prior to conclusion!Frank Hamersley wrote:Apparently, you do not know the meaning of plonk. I see you use twoBob Badour wrote:[..]
What say you Bob? The silence to date has been most instructive.I agree it is no problem to write the query to get the average agesselect case when count(*) = count(age)
where the age is known. Using null, how does one write the query to
get the correct result, ie. the average is unknown ?
then avg(age)
else null
end as avgage
from table
Cheers, Frank.
email addresses. Plonk again.
If you think it is appropriate to require the godawful mess above from a casual user to get a correct result for a simple query, you only confirm that you are an embecile.Feasibility was simply the challenge you posed - your subsequent protestations surely and simply demean yourself!
All this confirms my view that whilst you have significant knowledge in the CDT domain (and certainly more than I would ascribe to myself), you don't have the guts to stick out a discourse that does not go entirely your own way. Of course this is normal for bullies when events take an unexpected turn.
Much more curiously though your resort to bombastic posts (whilst a feeble trait IMO for anyone professing intellectual tendencies) seems to have recent CDTzens in thrall given the deafening silence to date. I would have thought there would be at least one with an opinion for either of our respective stances. Ce la vie - I live and learn.
You are not doing so bad at the bombast yourself.
An interesting comment and fair; cruel, but fair like Dinsdale. Clearly I was particularly identifying Bobs legendary abruptness with people he holds have nothing to contribute. However I will not resile from a style that hopefully has some wit and is more prosaic than simple utilitarian statements where possible. Even if the subject matter is dry the discussion can have a bit of colour IMO if it doesn't unduly affect the outcome.
More flame and less smoke, please.
:-) I thought there was enough flame(ing) already and hence very little smoke.
What is it with Bob though? Its not like its a case of the Emperors New Clothes - rather its more like a second rate knot in the cravat yet no-one else seems inclined to point it out, or conversely even lambast me if my response is faulty.
Cheers, Frank.
.
- References:
- Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- From: jiiiiim
- Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- From: Bob Badour
- Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- From: Frank Hamersley
- Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- From: Gene Wirchenko
- Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- Prev by Date: Re: A Logical Model for Lists as Relations
- Next by Date: Re: All hail Bob!
- Previous by thread: Re: All hail Bob (not)!
- Next by thread: XML databases
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|