Hi all,
I’m curious how many people out there have had a Ruby book proposal
rejected by O’Reilly & Associates in the last three years, what your
subject was, when you proposed it, and the person whom you dealt with
(i.e. who specifically rejected your proposal).
This may seem a strange question - please humor me. You can email me
offlist if you prefer at djberg96 at n0spam at gmail dot com. Remove
the ‘at n0spam’.
Please don’t ask why I’m asking, either. I will say nothing at this
time. For now I’m just collecting information.
Thanks,
Dan
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
proposal rejected by O’Reilly & Associates in the last three
years…
Let me expand that to the last five years (in case that matters).
Thanks,
Dan
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
Berger, Daniel wrote:
Please don’t ask why I’m asking, either. I will say nothing at this
time. For now I’m just collecting information.
Haven’t you been reading the technical press lately? You are doing your
employer a disservice by seeming to use your QWest soapbox (your status
as
a QWest employee) to criticize a book publisher.
I say “seeming” because you probably haven’t given any thought to the
juxtaposition of your sig and your opinion. A reasonable person would
probably conclude that there was no connection at all, but corporate
attorneys are not reasonable people.
Also, most books don’t make back their investment, so it is reasonable
for a
book publisher to be ruthless in rejecting book proposals. There might
be
too many Ruby book proposals right now, you may not have a track record
with publishers (I don’t know), there could be any number of perfectly
good
reasons to reject a proposal.
But I think it is a big mistake to air your personal grievance, from
your
desk at work, on company time, over a QWest sig.
Take my advice. Post your opinions from home, not work.
Related topic. Barnes & Noble remainders * two-thirds of the titles in
their
stores. Two-thirds! And their business plan works – people are
impressed
by the supermarket atmosphere created by all those titles, and they buy
more books as a result. There is more waste in a typical large bookstore
than there is at the local supermarket’s produce counter. Both
businesses
successfully market illusions.
- “Remainder” means rip the cover off the remaindered book and return
that
to the publisher for credit. The book itself is tossed in the local
trash.
com. Remove
the ‘at n0spam’.
Please don’t ask why I’m asking, either. I will say
nothing at this
time. For now I’m just collecting information.
Haven’t you been reading the technical press lately? You are
doing your employer a disservice by seeming to use your QWest
soapbox (your status as a QWest employee) to criticize a book
publisher.
What in the world are you talking about? Qwest is a telecom. We do not
publish books. There is no conflict of interest here. And there was no
criticism in my question. It’s just a question. I think ORA is, on the
whole, a very good publisher.
Please, don’t try to guess why I’m asking - it won’t work.
Regards,
Dan
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
Presumably you will also want a list of all those who made successful
pitches, including those that then had to pull out for their own
reasons.
Otherwise the numbers will mean nothing. I mean, just how many ‘Ruby
Cookbooks’ can their be?
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter H. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:07 AM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: Rejected Ruby book ideas by O’Reilly
Presumably you will also want a list of all those who made successful
pitches, including those that then had to pull out for their
own reasons.
Fair enough. I’d be interested to hear about those, too.
Regards,
Dan
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
On 21.09.2006 18:07, Berger, Daniel wrote:
Please, don’t try to guess why I’m asking - it won’t work.
You make it really sound like a spy plot. Can you at least promise to
solve the mystery at some future point in time (say less than a year
ahead)? Otherwise I might die from curiosity… :-))
Cheers
robert
You make it really sound like a spy plot. Can you at least
promise to
solve the mystery at some future point in time (say less than a year
ahead)? Otherwise I might die from curiosity… :-))
Certainly…offline. 
Regards,
Dan
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
On 9/21/06, Berger, Daniel [email protected] wrote:
From: Robert K. [mailto:[email protected]]
You make it really sound like a spy plot. Can you at least
promise to
solve the mystery at some future point in time (say less than a year
ahead)? Otherwise I might die from curiosity… :-))
Certainly…offline. 
This will be an interesting hallway conversation at RubyConf
Berger, Daniel wrote:
/ …
Haven’t you been reading the technical press lately? You are
doing your employer a disservice by seeming to use your QWest
soapbox (your status as a QWest employee) to criticize a book
publisher.
What in the world are you talking about? Qwest is a telecom. We do not
publish books. There is no conflict of interest here.
Right. And George Bush is not a religious leader. It is all in how
people
see things, not what they actually are. You are not paying attention to
appearances.
And there was no criticism in my question.
No one said or implied that there was. I called it a personal grievance
that seems accurate.
Please, don’t try to guess why I’m asking - it won’t work.
Too late for that. You are far too transparent.
And you are posting on matters having nothing remotely to do with your
employment, on company time. Your argument that there is no conflict of
interest is a double-edged sword – it means you shouldn’t be spending
company time on it.
On 9/21/06, Paul L. [email protected] wrote:
Berger, Daniel wrote:
Please, don’t try to guess why I’m asking - it won’t work.
Too late for that. You are far too transparent.
Is it just me or does this seem like a discussion between the
Man in Black and Vizzini?
Gene Venable wrote:
Am I permitted to read this message? What gives me an
obligation to notify anyone about anything by email if
anything whatsoever happens? How can demands be made about
what use of this communication is authorized when this
message has been posted publicly on the Internet?
That’s a good question. Does Google have to ask Qwest for permission to
spider this post? =)
–
Ola B. (http://ola-bini.blogspot.com)
JvYAML, RbYAML, JRuby and Jatha contributor
System Developer, Karolinska Institutet (http://www.ki.se)
OLogix Consulting (http://www.ologix.com)
“Yields falsehood when quined” yields falsehood when quined.
“This communication is the property of Qwest and may
contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this
communication is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.”
Am I permitted to read this message? What gives me an
obligation to notify anyone about anything by email if
anything whatsoever happens? How can demands be made about
what use of this communication is authorized when this
message has been posted publicly on the Internet?
On 9/21/06, pat eyler [email protected] wrote:
Is it just me or does this seem like a discussion between the
Man in Black and Vizzini?
Never get involved in a book war in Asia.
communication is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments."
Am I permitted to read this message?
No. You must now be liquidated. Fool! 
What gives me an
obligation to notify anyone about anything by email if
anything whatsoever happens? How can demands be made about
what use of this communication is authorized when this
message has been posted publicly on the Internet?
IANAL, but I highly doubt that the demands apply outside of Qwest, and
it’s very likely for defensive purposes only. I wish they wouldn’t
attach this disclaimer to email sent outside of our domain, but it’s out
of my control. BTW, I’m not the only one suffering from this on the
list.
I’m curious to hear comments from others on the subject.
Regards,
Dan
Berger, Daniel wrote:
What in the world are you talking about? Qwest is a telecom. We do not
publish books. There is no conflict of interest here. And there was no
criticism in my question. It’s just a question. I think ORA is, on the
whole, a very good publisher.
Please, don’t try to guess why I’m asking - it won’t work.
Regards,
Dan
This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential
or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
Berger, This is your boos.
You’re fired for prattling on on company time.
I’ll expect you out of the office by tomorrow !!!
Paul W. wrote:
Berger, This is your boos.
You’re fired for prattling on on company time.
I’ll expect you out of the office by tomorrow !!!
Boos ?? Did I say Boos ? I meant boss
On 9/21/06, Benjamin R. [email protected] wrote:
On 9/21/06, pat eyler [email protected] wrote:
Is it just me or does this seem like a discussion between the
Man in Black and Vizzini?
Never get involved in a book war in Asia.
I have spent the last several years building up an immunity to trolling
powder.