v-t-i-g-e-r references being blanked/removed?

[Buckie]

I'm curious to know why any references to v-t-i-g-e-r (sorry, but I need to write the name with hypens otherwise it gets removed) get replaced with dots when submitted through this forum? This is what happens when I write v-t-i-g-e-r correctly (name written between the quotes) "......". Even within a URL link to v-t-i-g-e-r, the name gets replaced, hence the link does not work.

I don't want to cause any aggrevation here, I'm just evaluating both products and it's nice to be able to compare them with questions in the forums. Is there something I don't know .

BTW, I find SugarCRM a fantastic product and full respect to it's developers.

Thanks for your comments.

[longreach]

The product you are referring to forked from SugarCRM Open Source after version 1.5. It initially made almost no acknowledgement that it was using Sugar code - and came out with essentially no value add either - it was a pretty blatant hijack. This has understandably caused SugarCRM to have little patience for having any involvement with them. Now - just let the issue die.

[its4fun]

I do not know about the ancient history, but as for the present, they have added significant features. All of it is open source including the outlook plugin and help desk portal. The have already replaced the database with their own and in version 5, which they have just released the alpha, they will have another chunck of code rewritten with enhanced teamwork functionality and and have a new interface.

Forking is permitted (and is common) in open source. Everything I have seen in the last year gives proper credit to sugar, but because these rumors have not died they want to replace all of sugar's code.

[ra42]

I have to agree with Matt. I also am not familar with the history between sugar and vt but censoring the name of a competior in these forums seems like a nasty business policy.

Surely it is in sugar's interest to have free and open discussion of all CRM options.

[longreach]

You know what guys - we're not at University or some other abstract institution of learning - we're in the real world - and personally I think Sugar can do what they like, as they pay for the server we are conversing through. If you like the other guys more than Sugar go hang out there. One thing I can tell you - code that runs on one does not run on the other without a fair bit of work - so there is little constructive aspect to discussing them here. Let me suggest again - drop it.

[Buckie]

Oh dear - I did not mean to start a war here. I was also totally unaware of the issues between both products. Regardless, many thanks for your comments. Here are my thoughts...

The product you are referring to forked from SugarCRM Open Source after version 1.5. It initially made almost no acknowledgement that it was using Sugar code - and came out with essentially no value add either - it was a pretty blatant hijack. This has understandably caused SugarCRM to have little patience for having any involvement with them. Now - just let the issue die.

Thanks for the history and the Sugar perspective - I was unaware of this.

I do not know about the ancient history, but as for the present, they have added significant features. All of it is open source including the outlook plugin and help desk portal. The have already replaced the database with their own and in version 5, which they have just released the alpha, they will have another chunck of code rewritten with enhanced teamwork functionality and and have a new interface.

Forking is permitted (and is common) in open source. Everything I have seen in the last year gives proper credit to sugar, but because these rumors have not died they want to replace all of sugar's code.

I am currently evaluating both products and it is very clear that both offer different solutions as their approach to CRM have differing perspectives and philosophies. It's nice to have options in life and be free to choose which solution best fits a particular challenge. BTW, I hate rumours - they are always negatively charged.

I have to agree with Matt. I also am not familar with the history between sugar and vt but censoring the name of a competior in these forums seems like a nasty business policy.

Surely it is in sugar's interest to have free and open discussion of all CRM options.

I also have to agree with its4fun & ra42 that censoring often has negative implications. I remember many, many years ago Microsoft censored the word Linux from being used in their forums. Such measures tend to lead to questions like 'is someone trying to hide something?'. I don't wish to suggest that anyone is trying to hide anything here, however, I am definitely for freedom of speech on public forums as long as the posts are related around the issues at hand i.e. CRM.

You know what guys - we're not at University or some other abstract institution of learning - we're in the real world - and personally I think Sugar can do what they like, as they pay for the server we are conversing through. If you like the other guys more than Sugar go hang out there. One thing I can tell you - code that runs on one does not run on the other without a fair bit of work - so there is little constructive aspect to discussing them here. Let me suggest again - drop it.

Yes, we are in the real world and I am sure all well educated. Nevertheless, business decision making is all about weighing up the pros and the cons, and where better to do this than through public forums and reading about real-life experiences.

Yes, Sugar can do what they want because they host this forum. Firstly, many thanks that they have given us the opportunity for such a mechanism of communication. However, surely it's in everyones interest to be able to express their view on issues, whether negative or positive. I don't believe any of us "like the other guys more than Sugar" - it's all about decision-making and getting as much info together before a particular solution is opted for and in different circumstances, different decisions will be made.

A final note. The initial reason for my post was simply one of enquiry. I did not wish to arouse tension between members. I value everyones feedback - I believe my question has now been answered. Many thanks.

[nport]

You know what guys - we're not at University or some other abstract institution of learning - we're in the real world - and personally I think Sugar can do what they like, as they pay for the server we are conversing through. If you like the other guys more than Sugar go hang out there. One thing I can tell you - code that runs on one does not run on the other without a fair bit of work - so there is little constructive aspect to discussing them here. Let me suggest again - drop it.

You know what Mr. Whitehead? There are some places in the real world where censorship is also looked down upon, including that very real world of where Open Source Software thrives. The real world also happens to be a place where some people who have actually been to "University" have gained a healthier appreciation that liberty, justice, courtesy and respect are more meaningful than the product of some "other abstract institution of learning". Maybe you would prefer that sector of the "real world" where stupidity and dictatorship find harmony, a place where as long as a person owns an product or service they are justified in whatever they do with it -- like the U.S. practice of apprehending Canadian citizens traveling through the U.S. and shipping them to Syria to be tortured because they happened to set foot on property "owned" by the jurisdiction of United States?

It is now my opinion that your position would be to defend the latter strictly on the basis that because they own the aircraft, "they can do what they like with it". It may very well be that "Sugar can do what they like" (plainly obvious to begin with), but that was not the issue was it. The issue was to question of whether their actions were appropriate (the right thing to do) or not. An issue you pathetically appeared to dodge and forcefully suggest we "drop". Well sir as I have now come to find such ugly sentiment from one who looks to be leader among a SugarCRM dictatorial and totalitarian mentality, I will indeed leave you to your little utopia and go back to spending my time in that part of the "real world" where such behavior isn't so common or endorsed.

Good day.

Nate

[longreach]

Aside from mentioning that I am a Canadian, and we recently gave that fellow over $10M by way of apology, and that like most people I am pretty horrified at what happened, I'm not sure I myself would liken the censorship in a privately-operated forum to for example, similar practices in a public newspaper or television station. But yes, it is perhaps time that the now-successful SugarCRM organization ended this practice. The events that led to it are over two years old now.