[AccessD] AccessD never changes

Ken,

Why should we be leading a pack?  The group was organized IIRC as an Access
Developer's group.  Access-L was for general Access learning and use, but
AccessD was all about development. We weren't trying to rack up points on
anyone's scorecard,  It provided a forum for like-minded developers to
share questions, issues, problems and discoveries with other developers who
might be interested or be able to use the information.  I don't remember it
ever being an "all your Access questions answered" kind of list.  The idea
was that you wanted to seriously push the limits of Access, and we pretty
much did that.

The purpose of expertise is to put it to use.  You can get answers on
Google, but it isn't the same as expertise.

Charlotte

On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Kenneth Ismert <kismert at gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > Jim Lawrence:
> >
> > Hardly depressing...that's life.
> >
>
> Jim,
>
> You miss the point. What is depressing is that we claim to fill a niche,
> namely advice and support for Access.
>
> And it seems, from this discussion, that we do a worse job of filling that
> niche than nearly anybody else.
>
> Can anybody name even one aspect of our group that is leading the pack?
> Number of posts, topicality, new members, search engine visibility? I dare
> say not one.
>
> I would even say we are not even in the middle of the pack for any measure
> you would care to name. The strongest point we have, expertise, is surely
> eclipsed by any of the much more lively groups mentioned in this
> discussion.
>
> And what is the point of expertise, if there is audience to benefit from
> it?
>
> Whine and moan all you want about the state of Access, but there are two
> undeniable points:
>
> 1. There is still a viable niche for Access support
> 2. We are doing a crap-ass job of filling that niche
>
> -Ken
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>