Re: problem with ux400

[TYSON@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM (Mabry Tyson)]

    Date: Tue, 26 Jun 90 17:29 EDT
    From: Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM (David A. Moon)

	Date: Tue, 26 Jun 90 15:05:33 -0400
	From: steven@linc.cis.upenn.edu
    
	We've been having a problem with our ux400.
	...
	Any ideas?

    I suspect that if you do the following:
	...

It's been awhile since I've said on the SLUG list that my opinion is
that some of these problems should be reported to
CUSTOMER-REPORTS@SYMBOLICS.COM rather than to the SLUG list.  When
people like David Moon are kind enough to supply suggestions, it is
appealing to just use SLUG as your first effort to get help.  However,
software support seems to me the appropriate way to do this.  (And if
you don't pay for software support/updates, then I don't have much pity
for you, sorry.)

SLUG is more appropriate when the problems are ones that Symbolics
customer support can't help you with.  I personally feel that I would
rather David be helping Symbolics move forward and let him be distracted
only by the problems that Customer-Reports can't handle get filtered up
to him.  (Of course, David may have a different opinion!)

I have less problem if SLUG is CCed on a message to Customer-Reports but I
don't know if Customer-Reports should CC SLUG on their reply.  I certainly had
no problem with Paul's **URGENT** message a couple of weeks back.  He needed
info immediately and SLUG runs all night.

The particular problem that was discussed above is certainly obscure and
may very well have gone to David eventually...


Disclaimer:  The above represents my personal opinion and not that of SLUG, Inc.
or of the SLUG electronic mail list!  (ie, I am not speaking as SLUG-REQUEST)