In "Neudeutsch" = "New German" = a sort of German "modernist" slang trying to literally translate English Expressions into German, a "Kontakt" now is a "contact" = a contact PERSON - how wunderful!

Fact ist, if you replace the term "contact person" with "contact", there is currently no term left for any contact (by personal call, by telephone call, by letter, by email, or any other way - are there other ways?) WITH that contact person.

Now here,

http://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/5209/25

= thread "Best personal information, knowledge and idea manager software?",

the last entry was,

Posted by Alexander Deliyannis
Dec 25, 2013 at 07:18 PM
Steve wrote:

I’ll post my usage of Chaos Intellect with my work flow in and out of
the program - I like in that sucker every day.

Does it now support Unicode or at least a good number of codepages? in the past, it was the main reason that I didn’t use it, even though I found it very elegant indeed.

But I refuse to give my impression on ChI in a thread named "Best..."

Since ChI is more or less rubbish.

There are 2 toptenreview.com reviews on it, in 2 different categories. Since we didn't get the promised (see above) ChI review here, I finally downloaded not ChI trial, but "Chaos Free" (or whatever they call it, it disappeared from my system in less than an hour), BUT I also consulted all online help files, including the ChI one, in order to verify my observations - if anybody wants to correct me, feel free to do so: I'd be happy to reconsider my stance. So:

- In the web, long-term users complain about the latest version's lack of reliability - I don't know, I can't say, but it certainly is an aspect to consider.

- I had trialled ChI some years ago (= previous version), and it was NOT possible to retain POP mail on the server, like that is possible in Outlook and other mail tools; in ChI you just could prolong the delay for deletion on the server up to 15 days if I remember well (or was it 30 days?), but preserving the mails on the server was not possible: Very bad - but then, today, even people like I have several devices to fetch their mail, so it's big time to leave POP mail accounts anyway (I'm currently searching for a better solution, and I think that paying some bucks a month in order to rent a virtual cloud Exchange server is the best solution; some providers get you mail together with your domains, but not even IMAP - of course, those offerings are complete rubbish, e.g. domain.com, lotsa "special offers" for this, and just POP accounts: ridiculous (we're 2014, remember?)).

- Then, I'm not alone in finding it visually rather appealing, which triggers some interest into this applic even if it's not very sophisticated as a CRM.

- BUT, "contacts", again:

in "Chaos" - a ridiculous name, but in fact, there IS chaos there, which you will not succeed in working out, so there is some premonitory value in that denomination -, you will have "contacts" (= contact persons).

You select such a person. Then, in an ideal applic, you would have a list of your "contacts" with that contact person, on screen; not so in Chaos.

You double-click on such a person; now only you'll get "contact history" (my term) and other details.

Now, how to do that "contact history"? Chaos says you should do it by "Tasks" - of course, this is a non-sense (tasks are for the future, contact history is history), but they simply don't have anything better to offer. I tried - it's terrible.

Then, they have "Notes" - oh, very well, or so you think!

In fact, the plural is only there to indicate that many such contact persons can each have one note, and one only - do you realize now how primitive this applic is?

It goes without saying that for any contact history, you would want to have, as a strict minimum (= not speaking of replicas of relevant documents to such contacts!), two views/panes:

- a window for each such contact with a contact person, and ideally with some additional standard fields; ideally, also, with a filtering function (which then would only list the relevant contacts)

- a compound window for all contacts with that contact person, and where you can scroll them all (of course, the fields above would have to be "translated" into tagged text for this) (We spoke of such a compound view with the respect to Citavi.)

As said, in Chaos, you only get the second variety, in the "Notes" field, and that's what I call Chaos; ideally, you would instead have a list field, with date, short description, kind of contact (telephone from them to us, from us to them, or personal call of our representative M/Ms xyz, email from us to them, from them to us, etc.), in a shortened form (= symbols), and then, by scrolling that list field, you would see the respective "full contact" fields.

- I had used "Act! 2000" for some time (but then left it for askSam, for CRM, and yes, AS needs some spicing up with macros before becoming a rather good CRM system, but after doing so, it IS a rather good CRM system, after all...), and so, I was rather pleased, at first look, by the additional fields Chaos has on offer, and which can be individualized... but then again, these fields apply to "contacts", i.e. to contact persons



Now, let's speak plain English: A CRM system which does not offer a correct contact history, has to be considered rubbish.

And, btw, most German would swear a "call" is a telephone call, and a phone call only, whilst originally, it's the visit of a representative.

Let alone ridiculous "New German" "Handy" for "mobile( phone)" - oh yes, all this is terrible, but in the case of "contacts", the prob lies with the English language:

Not clearly distinguishing between "contacts" (= calls and such), and contact persons (which would perhaps better be called "correspondent", or then, "interlocutor" or something like that if you want to avoid (= for abbreviation purposes) to use identical first chars) is the first step into the wrong direction, for a crm system; then, not grasping that you need quick access to a good contact history is the second one; and finally, not becoming aware that today's screens are larger than 1024x758 (and not making the customer profit from this) is the third and final step into real bad, for any sw.



If you have arguments why ChI was rather good or something from some other aspect, please tell us, but I think as an email tool, it's substandard, and as a crm tool, it's substandard, too: Having users ask, after that many years of development, even for CORE functionality, is not professional; lack of imagination in core elements is éliminatoire.

Also, if some native speaker had some ideas about better terms for "contact person" (or then, for "contact" in the sense mail/phone call/etc, so that "contact" could be preserved for what I call "contact person" at this time), that would be a treat, for us, and for the industry as a whole. And yes, it would be splendid if such term translated well into other languages like German, French, Spanish...

With all due respect, I find your posts rather hard to read at times and even when I do, it is often unclear what I am supposed to do.

I believe it's a rant about Chaos Intellect based on that product's use of the ubiquitous term "contact". But it could also be about the Westminster Dog Show. I'm not sure.

I find it ironic its about a piece of software called "Chaos Intellect".

ROFL
You made my day, Paulo.

Franz Grieser wrote:

ROFL
You made my day, Paulo.

As for me, it is bobmclain comment that had me rolling on the floor, laughing !

bobmclain wrote:

But it could also be about the Westminster Dog Show. I’m not sure.

Have a great day everyone !

If some readers here intellectually are not able to make up their minds if some author dares to speak about two different but linked subjects in the same article, they better shut up.

So, for the dumbos here, again, as simple as possible:

- The review of sw does not "incite to action" but is a review, i.e. some experience with that sw, and perhaps a recommendation to buy, or a recommendation to discard it from your buying decisions; such a recommendation might be implicit or explicit; here, it went with the invitation to people having more experience with one of the "Chaos" offerings, to bring some arguments "Pluses", in order to perhaps counterweigh my arguments "Minuses"; instead, you criticize my style: meta communic when arguments fail; so we are at the classic, again.

- Of course, ChI is more Ch than I, but that's there prob; I had been interested in here-promised experience with that applic, which didn't came, and so I ended up trialling it for myself, and yes, my look at sw is a that of a critic, not that of a fanboy, so people trying to protect bad sw should always be motivated to share their (probably biased) experience, in order to de-motivate me to do the writing on their behalf; of course, that former alternative be de-constructive for the product in question, and for the industry, globally, since praising sub-standard sw, instead of pointing to their faults, would harm overall development, but I tried to get this point - that bland criticism, when honest, is constructive - to some dumbos here, in the past, with zero success, so I don't have the slightest hope for being able to pass the message this time

- Also, EVERY time I see some "with due respect" - and that's another recurrence here -, I then read real dumb blah-blah, no argument: It seems that any time a dumbo wants to speak plain English bec/he's not happy, he falls for the illusion that "with a due respect" should replace missing arguments.

- Also, the article was info that instead of clearly distinguishing between "contact" (=mail, phone, throwing shit) and "contact" (person), in English, this English "contact" term now even more and more replaces native words like "Gesprächspartner" in other languages like German, where, by this imported "new speak", it becomes more and more difficult to distinguish between the "Kontakt" = e.g. throwing shit at people from those people you throw shit at (or try to sell to), even in non-English languages which clearly distinguished those objects in the good old days; I also invited you throw in some better terms which we, and developers of sw, then could adopt; I also tried to show why this distinction is mandatory, not only in discussion: In sw, you need different dialogs, list fields, etc. for those, and blurring the vocabulary being the first step into the wrong direction, not grasping the importance of having a good contact history in crm sw, like in ChI, then is a subsidiary effect of not applying the right terms to real life probs, here, grasping you need a list of persons, but for any such person, a list of your communications with that person.

- I never suggested Chaos sw mixes up "contacts" with "contacts"; I just said that the conversation in general mixes up two very different objects, giving them the same name, and that from this starting point, sw developers didn't see that they at least should clearly distinguish these very different concepts again, but I said this above, and in the post above, and by repeating it again and again, I don't imagine dumbos will see my point: It's just that the love for real bad sw must be withheld at all cost, even to the point of negating reality.

Again, if you don't grasp the interconnection of two related subjects, intellectually, don't read posts whose author even took the effort to point the reader, by proper titling, to the fact that the post will contain more than the just one basic subject your mind enables you to follow at every given moment.

And besides, it's ridiculous to create secondary accounts just to aggress people.

And it's not a new phenomenon here, either.

With all due respect, your posts are dense, poorly written jumbles, usually intended to denigrate software or software developers, or to make some esoteric point. It isn't that I don't understand what you're saying - although often I don't - but that I have no interest in even making the effort. I imagine others feel the same, since most of your posts draw no comments. Why not try to distill your thoughts into just a couple of paragraphs?

If it's acceptable for you to inflict these posts upon us, I'm sure you won't begrudge the "dumbos" a bit of fun with them.

(And by the way, this isn't a "secondary account". I've been here for years.)

22111 wrote:

And besides, it's ridiculous to create secondary accounts just to
aggress people.

I am afraid you overestimate your role here. Why would anyone in his senses waste his time to create a second account just to make fun of you? We're straight enough to do this openly.
And: Yes, I know you know me and you know where I live. Fine for you.

I also find 22111's contributions mostly incomprehensible and sometimes offensive, but isn't it time to give this topic a rest? Let's talk about software again, shall we?

Bill

22111 wrote:

- Also, EVERY time I see some "with due respect" - and that's another
recurrence here -, I then read real dumb blah-blah,

So you are saying that it happens to you in other forums, too?

don't read posts whose author even took the effort to
point the reader, by proper titling,

Yep, concise and to-the-point.

a dumbo wants to speak plain English

We appreciate your modesty.

I had an writing professor in college who taught us this lesson:

It's never the reader's fault if they don't understand you. It is the job of the author to write in such a way that the meaning of his or her work can't be misunderstood by the reader.

I suppose you can ignore that advice if you are a master writer, but for the rest of us, it is worth keeping in mind.

Steve Z.

WSP, whilst you are right that we should be talking about the topic in hand in this thread, it is not unreasonable for forum members who in the main have been here many years; and I would imagine similar to myself enjoy the calm respectful and information laden posts, to look somewhat askance to the iconoclast in our midst after his very many posts made over a sustained period of time.

I have tried to read the posts of '22111' and find them hard going because of his rambling and hectoring style, rudeness and great length. As I frequent other forums and am used to WUM's I know how they operate and am not convinced that 22111 is a WUM, although his presence here does puzzle me for one main reason: he puts time and effort into his very many loooooooooong posts and I have to wonder at how much free time he has on his hands and why he would keep pouring himself so determinedly into belabouring us here when typically his posts are either ignored outright or given only a cursory response?

This is not the first time that 22111's posts have been commented upon, although the kind of jocular posts about him in this thread are indicative of an increasing lack of patience with him and his patronising and argumentative manner. Perhaps he will learn, but I don't think he will unfortunately.

A couple of years ago I first encountered 22111 (when he traveled under a different name) in the MyInfo forum, where he began innocuously enough and then gradually produced general mayhem and distress just as he has here; and then, tracing him backward, I discovered that he had earlier had a similarly unhappy relationship with the AskSam forum.

He strikes me as a genuinely intelligent fellow with some occasionally interesting ideas (if you can penetrate his tangled prose, which makes *Finnegans Wake* seem lucid by comparison). But the real issue is his ad hominem arguments. They seem to be designed to stir up the forum, to provoke quarrels, and thus to make himself the center of discussion; that is why my advice is that we ignore the provocations and try to get back to other subjects.

One of the things I have always admired about this forum is its remarkable atmosphere of civility (comparatively rare on the Web) and mutual helpfulness.

Well, it's not a total loss. I hadn't heard of Chaos Intellect before 22111 brought it up here in the forum. I went to check it out, and have been playing with it for most of the day. It seems like an excellent replacement for Thunderbird, once I figure out how to efficiently import the many thousands of emails that have accreted to Thunderbird's innards like cholesterol these past couple of years. (That issue led me to Aid4Mail; haven't tried it yet, but it looks like it might do the trick.)

http://chaossoftware.com
http://www.aid4mail.com

WSP wrote:

A couple of years ago I first encountered 22111 (when he traveled under
a different name) in the MyInfo forum, where he began innocuously enough
and then gradually produced general mayhem and distress just as he has
here; and then, tracing him backward, I discovered that he had earlier
had a similarly unhappy relationship with the AskSam forum.

That's just the tip of the iceberg. He also engages from time to time in similar behaviour on the UltraRecall forum, DonationCoder.com, BitsduJour, etc., under a variety pseudonyms. Some of you will remember that we had the same issues with "Fredy" and "Foolness" on this forum a while back, whose posts were strikingly similar...

But the real issue is his ad
hominem arguments. They seem to be designed to stir up the forum, to
provoke quarrels, and thus to make himself the center of discussion;

Exactly. This type of behaviour on the internet is now well documented (trolling, WUM) and it's increasingly the subject of scientific study by psychologists, sociologists etc., so it's a complex issue.

that is why my advice is that we ignore the provocations and try to get
back to other subjects.

You're absolutely right. That's the only solution. "Don't feed the trolls," as they say. The problem is that even saying as much can just prolong things; on the other hand, if you don't say anything, new users or less frequent users walk straight into the trap.

WUM? That's the abbreviation for ...?

Just curious, Franz

From urbandictionary.com:

wum
It is an acronym meaning Wind-Up Merchant.

It refers to someone who posts on message boards and newsgroups with the intention to cause as much disruption as possible by goading others.
He's a WUM, just ignore his posts.

Mike

Thinks, Mike.