Secretaries Sacked After Flamewar at Work

ross.w writes "Two legal secretaries in Sydney have been sacked after a flamewar over a ham sandwich got circulated throughout the cities financial district. The insults about figures, boyfriends and jobs flew thick and fast and ultimately resulted in the dismissal of both of them for mis-use of the email system."

Comments

Hearsay

[fembots]

The spokesman said he still did not know whether or not Ms Nugent's lunch was stolen.

Rumor has it that Nugent's lunch was stolen by her ex-boyfriend who is now with Bird.

Warning: Do not pass this on.

Regardless, the person who forwarded these emails to external parties should be fired because company emails shouldn't be forwarded to unintended recipients without original author's consent.

Re:Hearsay

[Nan0c]

All bad really however you look at it. Link to email extract http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,2028 1,16522876-5001022,00.html

Re:Hearsay

[Bloke down the pub]

If they wanted to "sort out their differnces" (as we say in Blighty) they should have met up in the bike sheds after work for a good old fashioned punch up whilst their mates kept watch for teachers (sorry "bosses").

Or signed up to /. and had their flamewar here - highest karma after 5 days wins.

Ouch

[boola-boola]

That's exactly why you use personal email for personal things...

Re:Ouch

[mr_tenor]

Maybe that's what the guy in the article who said "Email is a business tool, not a personal messaging system" meant, but that particular sentence is totally false. Email is a set of network protocols that can be used for whatever. What is acceptable usage needs to be explicitly defined in company policy.

Re:Ouch

[John Seminal]

That's exactly why you use personal email for personal things...

I agree!

Now flame me if you must, but what happened to the good old days when the secretary was there to bring the boss a cup of coffee, and take his dry cleaning to the chinese place? You know... two wongs can make it white.

Work is not the place for women to be women. Work is the place for women to kiss ass.

Having said that, if I owned an internet porn company, I would try and hire the two of them for some hot firey angry lesbian action. Give them both a whiffle ball bat, tell them there are no rules- hit as hard as you can. because the looser is getting the wiffle ball bat in her ass. Give the winner $1000 and pay their rent for a month while they find a new job. Pay the loser nothing and put her picture on a billboard with the wiffleball bat hanging out her snatch.

Welcome to corporate warfare.

Re:Ouch

[MooseByte]

"That's exactly why you use personal email for personal things..."

Though sometimes the upfront and personal approach is best. For example:

"Well, I gotta tell you - I'd be very, very careful who you talk to about that, because the person who stole that sandwich... is dangerous. And this button-down, Oxford-cloth psycho might just snap and then stalk from office to office with an Armilite AR-10 carbine gas-powered semiautomatic weapon: pumping round after round into colleagues and coworkers. This might be someone you've known for years . . . someone very, very close to you."

Re:Ouch

[harkabeeparolyn]

Give me a fucking break. This was a major overreaction by the asshats these women worked for. I'm sure these women have friends still inside the company and they WILL quietly find a way to make the company pay many times over for what was done to their friends. Believe it.

Re:Ouch

[pyrrhonist]

I would try and hire the two of them for some hot firey angry lesbian action. Give them both a whiffle ball bat, tell them there are no rules- hit as hard as you can. because the looser is getting the wiffle ball bat in her ass.

I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter...

Re:Ouch

[randyest]

Please let this (bad) joke die. You didn't even do it right, not that it would have been funny either way.

Preemptive strike (please don't add any missing ones):

But do they run linux email clients?
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those
1. Flame co-worker via email
2. ???
3. Profit!

I don't have email access you insensitive clod!
I, for one, welcome our new email-flaming overlords.
Rude emails at work? Won't somebody think of the children?!
Well, in my day we used real flamethrowers to flame each other, and we liked it that way!
Ecpecting a dupe post in 5, 4, 3, . . .
Netcraft confirms, email flaming is dead . . .
All your jobs are belong to email flamewar.
George Bush is responsible somehow.
I have email flamewars at work all the time and there's never been a prob%^%@13#^$3@#$*^&^NO CARRIER

Re:Ouch

[randyest]

Did you read the actual emails or just the summary? They sound like nasty little harpies who probably annoyed half the staff.

Sometimes management (and staff) is just waiting for the office bitches (male or female) to violate a policy so they can fire the annoying bickerers.

Or it could be overreaction, but I have a hard time believing a really valuable employee who is otherwise well-liked, hard-working, and useful would get fired for this.

Re:Ouch

[the_wesman]

yes, personal e-mail should be used for personal business but.... I have to ask - does this stray the line? according to the rule we've both agreed on (personal e-mail/personal business) and the assumption that her lunch is considered personal business (despite the fact that she is allow to keep it in her "official company refrigerator" - as opposed to the "personal refrigerator" for her "personal lunch") she _should_ have... found out the "personal" e-mail address of all of the 'colleagues' to whom she wanted to address and then used her personal e-mail account to ask them if they had seen the "personal" lunch that was taken from her "official company refrigerator" ....

seriously, if some unclefucker stole my damn lunch from a refrigerator where I work, I would somehow (possibly using a strongly-worded flyer that I would have designed on my "official work" computer and, of course, used the "official company" printer to print rather than via my "official company e-mail" account) try to figure out what had happened to my lunch - is this "personal" business? yes, but the fact is, her lunch went missing in her office (perhaps she did put it on another floor, but still) so approaching her colleagues via "company" e-mail does not seem unreasonable to me

the way this escalated is immature but that's what you can expect from stupid bimbo secretaries (I am kidding)

Re:Ouch

[FireBreathingDog]

George Bush is responsible somehow.

But don't you see? Bush is responsible. This sort of thing didn't happen when Hillary Clinton was president!

Re:Ouch

[Anonymous Coward]

because the looser is getting the wiffle ball bat in her ass

best misspelling of loser ever!

Re:Ouch

[fm6]

That's just it -- this wasn't a "personal thing". It was a shouting match between two co-workers over nothing. It's proof that both persons are immature and don't understand proper workplace behavior. Giving "misuse of the mail system" as ground for terminating them was just an excuse. Any competant manager who found out about such a silly feud would want both participants gone.

Also, switching to an outside mail system would require exactly the kind of foresight flame warriors never show. If they were able to think that far ahead, they'd realize how stupid the whole argument is. Flame wars are an exercise of ego, not judgment.

Re:Ouch

[GNU(slash)Nickname]

because the looser is getting the wiffle ball bat in her ass.

I'm sure the tighter will be grateful you said that.

Re:Ouch

[child_of_mercy]

Allens are a big 5 law firm in Australia, they are so far up themselves they can see their own tonsils (and I used to work for a different big fiver).

Having said that this won't stand up a minute in an industrial court unless there is a long and documented history of abuse and counselling.

So they'll either get a huge payout or be back real soon.

Everyone's a winner except the precious partners of the firm and they won't notice the spare change.

Re:Ouch

[Anonymous Coward]

Our boss is also a business tool.

Re:Ouch

[guruevi]

You forgot: in Soviet Russia e-mail flames you

Re:Ouch

[thc69]

There is an email flamewar in here. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

(Did you bring your grue gun?)

Re:Ouch

[LaundroMat]

I like the "Email to a friend" link at the end of the article.

Re:Ouch

[BinaryCodedDecimal]

Not necessarily, in this context it might mean the one that isn't tighter.

Wow... well done on completely missing the joke by explaining it.

Re:Ouch

[Spock the Baptist]

E-mail is a tool of repression wield by self-perpetuating yankee running dog autocrats to repress proletariat peasants. The yankee running dogs have propagandized you into believing that we're an autonomous anarcho-syndicalist collective. Outdated imperialist dogma has perpetuated the social and economic differences of the proletariat and conceal that we're living in a dictatorship.

Wait...

Ooooh! Dennis! There's some lovely filth down here ...

Re:Ouch

[archen]

Women have friends in an office? Ever worked with women in an office? My worst enemy and I are chums compaired to women and their co-worker "friends". Sometimes I think if there weren't laws and social restrictions, it would look like WWE Smackdown in the front office when I come in the morning.

Amazing

[dtfinch]

That must have been quite a flame war to be reported on dozens of news sites and finally Slashdot. I hope nobody was killed over it.

Though they were fired over email, I doubt this is material worthy of the "Your Rights Online" section. They were both in the same office, cursing each other during work hours, except via email rather than verbally. Then they forwarded the emails to the rest of the office to get everyone involved, rather than working like their supposed to.

Re:Amazing

[PsychicX]

Just thank god it wasn't an emacs sandwich with vim in between. The fires would burn until the end of time *shudder*.

Re:Amazing

[kngthdn]

I agree, this is pretty stupid. The whole exchange of emails is here:

http://radar.smh.com.au/archives/2005/09/cutting_a _lawye.html

Foward your email

[Neil Blender]

I have all my email forwarded to a gmail account. If I get something personal that I wouldn't want anyone to know about or something sketchy at work, I reply from gmail.

Re:Foward your email

[tonejava]

Wouldn't that breach company privacy/non-disclosure agreements somehow?

From TA

[Sheetrock]

Email is a business tool, not a personal messaging system - the use of it in this case was not in any way acceptable, nor is that the way we expect people to treat their work colleagues

Maybe the economy would be a little better if businesses would focus on business instead of finding new and interesting ways of scanning and banning personal Internet use (or a dozen other irrelevant employee-control functions that cost money and time without producing product...)

Re:From TA

[Tim C]

If I was involved in a stand up shouting match with a colleague in the middle of the office, I'd expect to have some explaining to do.

Why should the email equivalent be any different?

This isn't about monitoring of email anyway, if you'd read even the summary(!) you'd have seen that this was a very public affair, with the emails ending up being forwarded all over the city. Most companies take a rather dim view of their employees publicly behaving like truculent children.

OMGLOL

[BlackMesaLabs]

BANNED!!! OLOLO

All I want to know is...

[s7726]

Are either of them hot, or possibly both of them?

That would make my day (night)

Re:All I want to know is...

[julien59]

Here is a link with pics. http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,2028 1,16525356-5001022,00.html

Re:All I want to know is...

[Spy der Mann]

Are either of them hot, or possibly both of them?

Helloooo dude... remember why they got sacked? They acted like a pair of harpies. You WOULDNT like to get involved with ANY of them.

Re:All I want to know is...

[The Meeper]

Sexy Kiwi accent? What, 'baaa'?

Sorry.

[jaromanda]

While cleaning the nineteenth floor, I noticed the fridge had been left open. Naturally I threw out all the spoiled contents. I hope I didn't cause too much trouble.

Stuff like this...

[ShatteredDream]

Really reinforces why my girlfriend and the other women in my life prefer a male-dominated office to a female-dominated office. Hell, my mom won't work for another woman again unless either she knows her well or hell freezes over thanks to the last time...

Aight

[ReformedExCon]

I put on my robe and wizard hat.

Re:Aight

[Anonymous Coward]

For those not familiar with the parent's reference

Lack of social skills

[Neo-Rio-101]

I used to work with two Japanese coworkers who had an email spat. They sat next to each other, but one day they had a heated debate. After that finished, they stopped all verbal communication and started sending nasty emails to each other... despite sitting only a meter apart.

Re:Lack of social skills

[tktk]

That's nothing...try a married couple sending angry IM's at each other while in their apartment.

The worse part was that the husband told me about it over IM during their fight. And the wife got even more pissed since she heard him typing...but not to her. I heard later that their argument basically started all over again because of the extra IM to me.

Obviously a geek couple.

Re:Lack of social skills

[techno-vampire]

Once, before the Internet was common, I was doing tech support for a small startup. The founder had given me permission to have, and examine the source code as needed. One day, while the chief programmer was chewing me out over the phone for doing exactly that, I was composing a fax to my boss telling him exactly what was going on. The programmer, who knew nothing except brute force and ignorance, was not amused, but shut up after the boss reamed him out for it.

Re:Lack of social skills

[mcrbids]

That's nothing...try a married couple sending angry IM's at each other while in their apartment.

My wife and I have been together for > 10 years. A long time. But there have been a few times where we were so enraged with each other, that verbal communication broke down.

In these very few cases, it has helped tremendously to be able to write out all our thoughts out and send them via e-mail back and forth. The somewhat impersonal touch afforded by email lets tempers cool, and lets the shouting-match argument fall back into being a reasonable debate.

I remember twice this happening - once when my wife was upstairs and me downstairs on the porch, and another time we were in the same room, and were openly polite to each other, both agreeing not to talk about it until we both agreed we were ready to, stepping in and out of the seat where the computer was in our bedroom.

It was really quite effective!

Re:Lack of social skills

[Davorama]

Moving the conversation to written form followed by conversation is how the marriage encounter program works. They place further constraints on things by pushing you to only write about your feelings and do so in the form of a love letter but once you give up on that bit (Neither my wife nor I could cope) you end up with a great tool for diffusing conflict.

Another use of the technique is to try it out with non-conflict related topics to stir up feelings and inspire conversations. It sounds dumb, but if you are in a rut after 10 years (13 for us) it's a nice tool to have in the shed.

Re:Lack of social skills

[Dogtanian]

That's nothing...try a married couple sending angry IM's at each other while in their apartment.

Reminds me of a tale about a deaf couple arguing. They were signing to each other, and the woman was signing something when the man shut his eyes.

Apparently, the woman tried to prise his eyes open in an effort to get him to see what she was saying...

Re:Lack of social skills

[Dogtanian]

Unfortunately, those particular comments got stripped before we delivered the product to our Fortune-100 customer.

Hmm... comments like that have a nasty tendency to reappear or get missed even when you think they've been removed.

That's why I'd never put anything in my code that was liable to cause major embarassment, even if I was sure it would be removed later on. And if I was the boss in that office, I'd certainly DP the programmers in question for (a) Risking the above happening, and (b) Being grossly unprofessional and letting their personal spat spill over into their work.

Slashdot

[circletimessquare]

News from Fark. Stuff that doesn't matter.

Incidentely

[strider44]

Since this stupid story was just inside at the front of the paper today, I might as well transcribe the transcript for you all...

Katrina Nugent
Yesterday I put my lunch in the fridge on Level 19 which included a packet of ham, some cheese slices and two slices of bread which was going to be for my lunch today.
Over night it has gone missing and as I have no spare money to buy another lunch today, I would appreciate being reimbursed for it.

Melinda Bird
Katrina, There are items fitting your exact description in the level 20 fridge. Are you sure you didn't place your lunch in the wrong fridge yesterday?

Katrina Nugent
Melinda, probably best you don't reply to all next time, would be annoyed to the lawyers.
The kitchen was not doing dinner last night, so obviously someone has helped themselves to my lunch. Really sweet of you to investigate for me!

Melinda Bird
Katrina, since I used to be a float and am still on the level 19 email list I couldn't help but receive your rediculous email - lucky me!
You use our kitchen all the time for some unknown reason and I saw the items you mentioned in the fridge so naturally thought you may have placed them in the wrong fridge.
Thanks I know I'm sweet but I only had your best interests at heart. Now as you would say, "BYE"!

Katrina Nugent
I'm not blonde!!!

Melinda Bird
Being a brunette doesn't mean you're smart though!

Katrina Nugent
I definitely wouldn't trade places with you for "the world"!

Melinda Bird
I wouldn't trade places with you for the world...I don't want your figure!

Katrina Nugent
Let's not get person (sic) "Miss Can't Keep A Boyfriend".
I am in a happy relationship, have a beautiful apartment, brand new car, high pay job...say no more!!

Melinda Bird
Oh my God I'm laughing! happy relationship (you have been with so many guys), beautiful apartment (so what), brand new care (me too), high pay job (I earn more)....say plenty more.....
I have 5 guys at the moment!
haha.

Re:Incidentely

[kieronb]

I definitely wouldn't trade places with you for "the world"!

She should be fired just for that misuse of quotation marks.

Re:Incidentely

[fucksl4shd0t]

They were both obviously fired because they were both so completely incompetent they couldn't even conduct a proper flame war.

Now, if I was in this flame war (and if I was a woman), it would read more like this:

Me: You stupid bitch, I ate your sandwich. I thought it would save a few pounds off your fat ass and I hadn't eaten in two days.

Her: At least I'm not blonde!

Me: Your pussy hairs don't lie you little slut.

Her: What?!

Me: That's right. I got pictures. When my dog was licking you in your "sweet spot", and your pussy hairs are blonde alright!

Her: Well, at least I have one!

Me: One what? One brain cell? One ovary? One tit? You're so fat...blahblah

Get the idea?

I don't know what's worse, being incompetent, or getting fired over a lame flame war.

Re:Incidentely

[Anonymous Coward]

then, where did the whole "I'm not blonde" thing come from?

Brunette182: Wher my samich U theving asshats?
Blondie69: dood you left it on 20 floor Yur stupid
Brunette182: F U! Ur teh stupid blonde here!
Blondie69: Your ugle
Brunette182: Im teh coolist.
Blondie69: Ur jelous of my coolnees
Brunette182: Wahtever

Re:Incidentely

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually some of the story has not been told properly.

One of the secertaries sent an office wide e-mail asking where her lunch was, another secretary thought it would be a good idea to 'Reply All' telling the other secretary she had seen her lunch on another floor - thus embarrasing the first one.

Unfortunately both of them decided to carry on replying to all, even after halfway through their argument a polite e-mail was sent saying not to include the entire office.

It has become a news story because it was not a quiet spat between two people, they deliberately sent them company wide.

Some people found it funny enough to send on to external people - and thus the raging fire begins.

Don't reply to all across a company, especially if your fighting like school children. The secretaries should be fired, for being so dumb.

Re:Incidentely

[Gob Gob]

"They were both obviously fired because they were both so completely incompetent they couldn't even conduct a proper flame war."

BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS

!!!!!!!!!

They were fired because their tits weren't big enough!!!

Re:You can get sacked for that?

[onosendai]

Given the current moves to change the IR(Industrial Relations) laws in Australia, this will probably be the case here too soon. Currently, employees are protected under a scheme of unfair dismal legislation, which, should the changes pass, will be removed.

Can't wait for..

[Tracer_Bullet82]

the ensuing " Two Linux Engineers were fired for having a public kde-gnome e-mail flamewar"..

I still wonder why it has never happens over the years?

Lost opportunity

[macemoneta]

The company could have used this as a viral marketing tool to their advantage - or sold it to some entertainment company (new reality show, with an email component?). It clearly caught the interest and attention of many people.

her name is katrina

[Madd Scientist]

does anyone else realize that the only reason this is news is because some schmoe was searching online for "katrina" and came across this pointless story?

brilliant

[colton cummings]

Someone is going to find the sandwhich in some refrigerator, and it's going to be great.

Re:Copy of the e-mails?

[randyest]

It's hugely disappointing and unfunny. The sandwich looks pretty good though, better than the chicks (warning: catfight fantasy spoiler link.)

What a stupid thing!

[mrchaotica]

Not only is that the lamest, most pitiful flamewar I've ever seen, but shouldn't legal secretaries, of all people, use good grammar?! Even people on Slashdot are more literate!

Re:What a stupid thing!

[GrahamCox]

Even people on Slashdot are more literate

No they're not. Let's not get carried away... ;-)

Re:What a stupid thing!

[lawpoop]

Forget grammar, what about common internet abbreviations?

" Melinda Bird: Oh my God I'm laughing! "

Melinda Bird: OMG LOL!

Re:What a stupid thing!

[GuavaBerry]

To make even more sense of it, run it through everyone's favorite AOLer translation script:

KATRINA NUG3NT
YESTERDAY I PUT MAH LUNCH IN TEH FRIDGA ON LAVEL 19 WHICH INCLUD3D A PAKAT OF HM SOME CHESE SLIECS AND TWO SLIECS OF BR3AD WHICH WAS GONG 2 B FOR MAH LUNCH 2DAY
OVER1!111 OMG NIGHT IT HAS GONA MISNG AND AS I HAEV NO R MONEY 2 BUY ANOTHER LUNCH 2DAY I WUD APRECIAET BNG REIMBURSED FOR IT

M3LINDA1!!1 OMG WTF LOL BIRD
KATRINA THEYRE R IETMS FITNG UR 3XACT DESCRIPTION IN TEH L3VEL 20 FRIDG3!!11 OMG WTF LOL R U SUR3 U DIDNT PLAEC UR LUNCH IN TEH WRONG FRIDG3 YEST3RDAY

KATRINA?!?!!??? OMG WTF LOL NUG3NT
MELINDA PROBABLY BST U DONT REPLY 2 AL NEXT TIEM WUD B ANOYED 2 TEH DA!1!!! WTF KITCHEN WAS NOT DONG DIN3R LAST NIGHT SO OBVIOUSLY SOMAONE HAS HELP3D THEMSELVES 2 MAH LUNCH1!!1 OMG LOL RILLY SWET OF U 2 INV3STIGAET FOR MA

M3LINDA!!1!1 LOL BIRD
KATRINA SINCA I US3D 2 B A FLOAT AND M STIL ON DA LEVEL 19 3MALE LIST I CUDNT HELP BUT RAC3IEV UR R3DICULOUS EMALE - LUKY U!!!111! WTF LOL USA OUR KITCHAN AL DA TIEM FOR SOM3 UNKNOWN RAASON AND I SAW TEH IETMS U MENTION3D IN TEH FRIDG3 SO NATURALY THOUGHT U MAY HAEV PLAECD THEM IN TEH WRONG THX111111 LOL I KNOW IMM SWET BUT I ONLY HAD UR BST INTAR3STS AT HEART1111! OMG NOW AS U WUD SAY BYE

KATRINA1!11! WTF LOL NUGANT
IMM NOT BLONDE!

MELINDA!1!11!!!!1!!!1!!!!! OMG WTF LOL BIRD
BNG A BRUNETA DOASNT MEAN UR SMART THOUGH

KATRINA1!!1! OMG NUGENT
I D3FINIETLY WUDNT TRAED PLAECS WIT U FOR DA WORLD

MELINDA!!11!1 OMG WTF BIRD
I WUDNT TRAED PLAECS WIT U FOR DA WORLD.I1!!111!111!!! LOL DONT WANT UR FIGUR3

KATRINA111!!1!! WTF NUGENT
LETS NOT GAT PERSON (SIC) MIS CANT KEP A BOYFREIND
IM IN A HAPY RELATIONSHIP HAEV A BAUTIFUL APARTMANT BRAND NU CAR HIGH PAY JOB.SAY11!!!11!1!!11111111 LOL NO MORA!

MELINDA!1!111!!!1 WTF OMG IMM LAUGHNG!1!11 LOL HAPY RALATIONSHIP U HAEV BEN WIT SO MANY GUYS) BAUTIFUL APARTMENT (SO WUT BRAND NU R (M3 2) HIGH PAY JOB (I EARN MOR3)..SAY!!111!!!!11!1!!1!!1!!1!! WTF PL3NTY MORE..
I11111!!111!!1!11!111!!1!!1!111 LOL HAEV 5 GUYS AT TEH MOMANT
HAHA!11!!! WTF

Typical

[Hits_B]

This is the kind of shit that happens when people hide behind e-mail instead of working out issues face to face. The tone of someones e-mail is too easily misinterpreted. And no I didn't RTFA!

Re:You forgot!

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, dead horse beats YOU!

External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?)

[rakslice]

>Regardless, the person who forwarded these emails to external parties should be fired because company emails shouldn't be forwarded to unintended recipients without original author's consent.

Why? Was that in the company's acceptable use policy (AUP)? NO?

Many companies have yet to effectively leverage the online employee comportment solutions that are available in the idea marketplace. In the online world, synergies for mitigation of "water cooler" discussions can be harnessed LIKE NEVER BEFORE!

Does your company's AUP need dusting off? Is the disused lavatory that houses the locked Employee Manual filing cabinet just not recieving the foot traffic it deserves because the door is missing its 'Beware of the Leopard' sign? ACT NOW!

Check out some of the quality AUP elements that are at work on my own personal mailbox sender storage space use policy:

- Senders must grant unlimited reproduction, modification, and distrubution of their message contents

- Senders agree to have all AUP-related feedback handled by the on-line erectile disfunction medication retailer that I've received the most spam from this week (currently instant-pharmacy.net, in case you're interested)

Remember: It's quality outsourcing possibilities like these that let me keep my service levels up! Imagine how dissappointed I would be if my customer service workload made me LOSE OUT on the EXCELLENT FREE KARMA available by forwarding little Johnny's request for postcards out to 20 of my BESTEST FRIENDS (who judging by my inbox contents are all direct e-mail marketers)! Now that would just be plain sad.

(Apologies to the late Mr. Adams for blatant fair use of the leopard bit.)

-aT

Re:External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?)

[timmarhy]

"Regardless, the person who forwarded these emails to external parties should be fired because company emails shouldn't be forwarded to unintended recipients without original author's consent." i don't believe those tags on emails cut the legal mustard anyway, since you have no opertunity to view said contract before accepting the email. quite frankly, if you send me an email, then i'll do what i want with it and anyone who doesn't like it can fuck off and not send it in the first place

Re:External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?)

[LordLucless]

I agree about those tags down the bottom of the email, but I expect a large law firm probably has policies that their employees are expected to follow that would apply to his situation.

They probably say that email is not to be used for non-work related purposes (Every place Ive worked at has had that one) but as a law firm, I'd imagine they'd need a strict policy about internal correspondance leaving the firms internal network.

Whoever sent the email to someone outside the office is probably going to get reamed.

Re:External Parties (Why wasn't I invited?)

[Rich0]

They probably say that email is not to be used for non-work related purposes (Every place Ive worked at has had that one) but as a law firm, I'd imagine they'd need a strict policy about internal correspondance leaving the firms internal network.

Even such a clause can be hard to enforce legally if the defence can show that it is not enforced uniformly. That is the danger of broad contract clause. If the defence can show that EVERYBODY violates the contract, then the courts will question the wisdom of enforcing it in any particular case.

For example, if the windows EULA contained a restriction that said that if you mow your own lawn you agree to give Bill Gates the title to your home, that is technically an agreement to avoid a particular activity. If MS then slectively went after windows copyright violators using this clause it would be likely to be found unenforceable, since it is being used selectively.

The fact is that most companies do in fact tolerate personal use of email despite wording to the contrary in the AUP. If the defence can show that many others send personal emails, and that their managers are aware of this activity, then the court may be likely to question why they are being singled out. Otherwise a company who wants to get rid of all its over-40 employees could just do an audit and fire just these employees for sending personal emails.

Many companies as a result have AUPs that specifically allow personal use of email within certain bounds. A court is more likely to uphold such an AUP if the bounds sound reasonable and has in fact been violated (such as running a personal business on company time, or sending bulk mail or many large emails, or excessive use of company time). Additionally, if an employee is excessively using time at work for personal business it is likely that their performance will suffer and that is clearly cause for termination.

Re:You can get sacked for that?

[James_Aguilar]

The facts that back this up are that employment at will is so common that everyone does^Wshould (Did you see that clever hacker reference?) know about it. Although things may have changed since 2001, this article seems to show that New York is not one of those states in which "Wrongful dismissal" is a serious charge except in the case of an implied contract.

In any case, even if this were the case in New York, most companies make you sign stuff about your usage of email. Any misuse of email is normally an actionable offense "Up to and including termination" (That was the phrase on the last employee agreement I signed.). I've worked at several different places and they all had clauses like this, so I don't know if your company is just really nice or if you just don't have broad experience, but generally speaking, that's the way it is in the States.

not so bad for a bloke...

[weighn]

My 1st long term employment was one of 3 men amongst about 50 women in a Library and (possibly because I was only 19 at the time) it was fantastic!

Now, 15 years older, I find myself in a male only IT dept and long for: 1. that old work envrionment, 2. the knowledge of the "fairer-sex" that I have gained in the 15 years since, and 3. To be 19 again!

FULL TRANSCRIPT PROPERLY FORMATTED

[cvodebasher]

http://members.iinet.net.au/~codebasher/rofl.htm

urban legend? -- sad, but no.

[weighn]

Radar/SMH (respectable broadsheet) lead with the story and used pseudonyms for legal reasons.

News Ltd affiliates (tabloid bog paper) came out a day later with a full page story, photos, names.

The spirit of Fleet Street is alive and well and living in Sydney.

Read between the lions

[MegaFur]

Maybe the real reason they got fired was that they were behaving like children, and the abuse of the email system thing was just a convenient excuse.

WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE

[firepacket]

If you were wondering what these two felines looked like... Here are their pics:

http://firepacket.net/mirror/flamewar.html

mediocrity-r-us.au

[toby]

Yep - That's the Australia I remember.

Re:guns illegal in Australia

[drsmithy]

Exactly why we banned guns in Australia.

Guns aren't "banned" in Australia. They're merely not as easy to get as they are in some other countries - and it's highly doubtful the knee-jerk response to Port Arthur has made this country any safer.

Some of the problems in America could not happen in Australia as a result. (Oops probably a flamewar in the making)

They're probably less likely to happen - but it's got nothing to do with guns and everything to do with culture and society. The plethora of examples of countries with high gun ownership rates and low[er] gun crime rates (and vice versa) demonstrate quite plainly that it's got nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with people. As was handily demonstrated by the recent anarchy and violence after Katrina hit.

America is simply a violent culture. If they weren't shooting each other, they'd be stabbing and bludgeoning each other. The problem isn't mechanical, it's social (just to keep those flames burning)...

Nah...

[TheLink]

I dunno about poised and stately.

Most guys aren't that interested in clothes or other stuff in department stores. Not enough to draw blood anyway...

Maybe if it were some other stuff say a BMW at 90% off, then you'd see some kicking and shoving. But clothing? Shirts or trousers? Nah...

Also most guys know that there's a significant chance that the other guy would kill or severely harm you if you really piss them off. "Damn the consequences" is a common guy thing - just look at the newspapers of people killing and being killed. Mostly guys involved.

So for guys, shoving around other guys is a bad idea.

Ladies/girls often get away with shoving/smacking guys. We tend to be more bemused or sometimes even amused when that happens.

Re:guns illegal in Australia

[fbjon]

In that case there's a problem with the gun culture. I think strict gun laws can help change the culture in the long run. It's impractical in the short run, but that doesn't necessarily make the law bad.

LOSER AUSSIES!

[TiggertheMad]

I agree, this is pretty stupid.

Stupid doesn't begin to describe it. Try pathetic. They wouldn't last 30 seconds on alt.flame.flame.flame.

George Bush is responsible somehow.

[TapeCutter]

"George Bush is responsible somehow."

That's what the Commie / Greenie / Hippy / Unwashed / Socialist / Liberal / Lesbian / Girly men at the NYT want you to think.

******>> Puts on tinfoil hat and sticks toy US flag ontop of the monitor.

No spare money to buy lunch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Katrina Nugent
Yesterday I put my lunch in the fridge on Level 19 which included a packet of ham, some cheese slices and two slices of bread which was going to be for my lunch today. Over night it has gone missing and as I have no spare money to buy another lunch today, I would appreciate being reimbursed for it.

Katrina Nugent
Let's not get person (sic) "Miss Can't Keep A Boyfriend". I am in a happy relationship, have a beautiful apartment, brand new car, high pay job...say no more!!

What? She can't afford to replace a packet of ham, some cheese slices and two pieces of bread on her high paid job?

Re:In A.D. 2005

[Norfair]

(Flame)war was beginning.

Brunette: What happen?

Blonde: We get signal.

Brunette: What !

Blonde: Microsoft Outlook turn on.

Brunette: It's You !!

Boss: How are you women !!

Boss: All your jobs are belong to us.

Boss: You are on the way to destruction.

Brunette: What you say !!

Boss: You have no chance to survive make your office empty.

Boss: HA HA HA HA ....

Brunette: Take off every 'email' !!

Brunette: You know what you doing.

Brunette: Move 'email'.

Brunette: For great justice.

(Okay, I could have done better, don't mod me down for rushing :) and thanks for formatting the last one so nicely, Slashdot)

A more detailed pic

[colonic]

This pic is less blurry.

Re:guns illegal in Australia

[TapeCutter]

"Guns aren't "banned" in Australia. They're merely not as easy to get as they are in some other countries"

Since you are from Oz I am probably not telling you anything you don't know already, but the truth is alot of firearms available in the US are "banned" over here. The gun in the GP post's quote, (from Fight Club IIRC), would be illegal and near impossible to obtain. Most people only have access to registered single shot rifles and "snap-load" shotguns, pistols must be kept in a secure armory at a registered gun club. Semi-auto rifles are a big no-no, getting caught with a machine-gun will give you your 15 minutes of fame in the media.

A few studies have been published showing the laws have made a slight improvement in the rate of shooting deaths but it's harder than you think to measure. Common-sense says a nut can no longer go hunting humans on a whim, the nuts now have to plan ahead, not to mention the extreme difficulty in finding the firearms and ammo on our island continent. Making it difficult for a nut to shoot multiple people in a short space of time is what the Port Aurthur laws were designed to accomplish and I think they have worked well.

"America is simply a violent culture. If they weren't shooting each other, they'd be stabbing and bludgeoning each other. The problem isn't mechanical, it's social"

I have to agree that gun control is largely a cultural thing, but not all of it. Mechanics can play a significant part in some common senarios. For example, statistically (in the US) shootings are roughly 5X more lethal than stabbings so more "heat of the moment" events (including suicide) end in death when there is a loaded gun in the top draw of the dresser. Those who survive a gun shot wound are 20X more likely to be permenantly disabled in some way compared to a stabbing victim. (Ref: old Scientific American magazine on my bookshelf).

I have lived in Oz for 40+ years and I think the Gun laws have kept pace with our culture over that time. I am usually the last to praise politicians but I think our Government has done a pretty good job at finding sensible bi-partisan compromises over the years. I can't walk into k-mart and buy ammo anymore but I can still go and shoot rabbits if I want to. I have nothing against responsible hunting and target sports, personally I just don't feel the young man's urge to blow furry things apart anymore, even if they are a tasty pest for the dog.

Slow learners

[beforewisdom]

One of the oldest email etiquette lessons around has been not to get into pissing contests over email. It is descended from an even more ancient rule before the era of tech "be careful what you put in writing".

It would be tempting to call these secretary's slow learners, but I can remember reading a slashdot article about men in an IT company plotting to take other personnel ( and customers ) with them to form their own breakaway company. They used company blackberries for these communications!

So, it isn't about being tech savvy, it is about common sense or the lack of it.

Unfair?

[beforewisdom]

The secretaries were in the wrong, they got fired.

However, other people in the company, lawyers, were the ones who passed the email exchange onto people outside of the firm.

If you ask me they have equal responsibility in embarrassing the company and should get an equal penalty.

If they haven't my guess would be because they are more valuable to the company or the company is like most in being cowardly and does not want to risk firing lawyers.

These guys ( in addition to the secretarys ) should be ashamed of themselves.

Re:Gun Related Deaths per 100,000 People

[Jamu]

Here are the murder statistics from 2000.

United States 4 per 100000 people
Australia 1 per 100000 people
United Kingdom 1 per 100000 people
Japan 0 per 100000 people

It's interesting to compare them with the gun-related deaths above.

United States 14 (per 100000 people)
Australia 3 (per 100000 people)
United Kingdom 0 per 100000 people
Japan 0 per 100000 people

Murder statistics are similar in the UK and Australia but Australia has many more gun-related deaths.

Re:guns illegal in Australia

[qwijibo]

It has nothing to do with the gun culture. It's about criminals. Since the laws were passed, those who chose not to comply are criminals. There are also those who get guns through other illegal means that are also criminals. I would think the ones who would sell guns illegally are more likely in the second group. I don't believe that failing to comply with a law that makes ones property illegal at the stroke of a pen means those people are just biding their time before they go on a killing spree.

So, if I understand correctly, the goal is to change the behavior of criminals through new laws? Perhaps I'm missing something, but I thought they were criminals because of their lack of respect for the law, not because there weren't enough laws. This solution seems impractical in the short run, and history doesn't show too much promise for the long run.

I would be more interested in knowing what short or long term social benefit was gained by making the first group of people criminals.

Moderators: this thread isn't offtopic, the topic is a flame war. =)

Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[DF5JT]

Whatever happened to a sane style of communicating with people over e-mail?

I remember times where people actually quoted relevant material from previous mails, trimmed down unnecessary garbage and answered questions *below* the question itself.

These days you need to sift through millions of lines of excessive "Original Message" quoting without any reference to the actual contents of previous messages. Sucky line breaks, HTML-crap, incoherent writing and idiotic bitmap smileys have made e-mail communication a Pain In The Ass, but certainly not an effective means of getting things done in a coherent fashion.

Thank god there are some lonely islands in usenet with old-fashioned people who take the three seconds to trim down excessive quoting, who put answers *after* the questions and who know how to use an editor to get a message across.

One of these days I am going to start a company that uses a newsserver as its main means of internal communication and I'll fire everyone who doesn't play by the rules of old style usenet posting.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[Thuktun]

I remember times where people actually quoted relevant material from previous mails, trimmed down unnecessary garbage and answered questions *below* the question itself.

In business politics, someone can get added to the thread after the fact or get the mail forwarded to them, and the presence of a message history greatly aids in their understanding. This is really a work-around for poor tools and processes.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[Doc_NH]

I bet top posters drive you crazy. :o)


Whatever happened to a sane style of communicating with people over e-mail? I remember times where people actually quoted relevant material from previous mails, trimmed down unnecessary garbage and answered questions *below* the question itself. These days you need to sift through millions of lines of excessive "Original Message" quoting without any reference to the actual contents of previous messages. Sucky line breaks, HTML-crap, incoherent writing and idiotic bitmap smileys have made e-mail communication a Pain In The Ass, but certainly not an effective means of getting things done in a coherent fashion. Thank god there are some lonely islands in usenet with old-fashioned people who take the three seconds to trim down excessive quoting, who put answers *after* the questions and who know how to use an editor to get a message across. One of these days I am going to start a company that uses a newsserver as its main means of internal communication and I'll fire everyone who doesn't play by the rules of old style usenet posting.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[robertjw]

I bet top posters drive you crazy. :o)

You know what's interesting? I have friends that I have attempted to email the way the GP described and they emailed me backup complaining that they couldn't figure out what I was talking about. Now I just top post - seems to be more readable to the average user.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[C0deM0nkey]

seems to be more readable to the average user

Only because the average user has been *trained* by bad messaging habits to read email that way.

Top-posting is fine (it annoys me, but its tolerable) if you are engaged in a single-threaded, IM-style conversation where you only have to answer one question at a time. When someone asks multiple, unrelated questions in a single email or touches on multiple topics that cannot all be dealt with in a single response, top-posting falls flat on its face.

The division on this issue seems to be squarely along business users and technical users. Most technical users have been trained in Usenet-style posting: trimmed messages, clear annotation, appropriate response. Business users have been trained by Microsoft - fire and forget.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[robertjw]

Only because the average user has been *trained* by bad messaging habits to read email that way.

Actually, I don't believe the people I am referring to were 'trained' at all. My experience has been in my personal correspondance with friends and family - most of their experience with computers is limited to browsing the web and using Yahoo mail, not sure we can blame Microsoft.

Top-posting is fine (it annoys me, but its tolerable) if you are engaged in a single-threaded, IM-style conversation where you only have to answer one question at a time

Your point is well taken, but the most appropriate method of communication should be used in any given situation. I find it somewhat interesting that the Usenet-style posting is the approved standard by the technical community. I can't think of any other communication method that historically used a similar style. If I wrtie a letter by snail-mail I don't include the contents of the previous letter at all. If I communicate by telephone I don't formally repeat the other person's words.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[C0deM0nkey]

I don't believe the people I am referring to were 'trained' at all.

Well...they were not formally trained. They were trained by the user interface and came to expect that all user interfaces would be similar or they just flat out don't care. In either case, a de facto standard was born. The question now becomes who set that de facto standard: Microsoft with 90%+ of the desktop market (my vote) or web mail (which probably tried to emulate the desktop because it was already familiar to the user and/or designer who did not want to break with a familiar paradigm, regardless of whether or not it was the *right* paradigm).

I can't think of any other communication method that historically used a similar style.

This is a very good point but I think the relevant point is that at no time in prior history was such a model of communication even possible: near instantaneous (within minutes) written communication?

I believe the difference is that Usenet posting and much emailing by technical users is conversational versus informational: two (or more) people engaged in correspondence via Usenet are really engaged in a conversation that can most easily be "overheard" by a newcomer if written in a conversational style. Two people corresponding via manuscript are (usually) just providing information to one another. When trying to actually converse with one another, they have to resort to memory jogging conventions that complicate the message ("With regard to your point that...yadda, yadda, yadda."). Given that email dispatch is virtually instantaneous (compared to snail mail) it would seem that a more efficient means of conversing is required.

When usenet styles are appropriately used, usenet reads like a conversation that you are overhearing - if you want greater context you go further back in the archives; top-posted email reads like an ongoing, snail-mail conversation and is somewhat out-of-place given the means of dispatch. The reason it is particularly annoying is, as you know, the complete absence of context in the response - there is an expectation that you have read the entire conversation because it is included *in every email*; you are expected to wade through much information of little interest to you in order to figure out the context of a single statement that appears to start up out of nowhere.

Re:Oh, the horror of Outlook Express

[robertjw]

...are really engaged in a conversation that can most easily be "overheard" by a newcomer if written in a conversational style. Two people corresponding via manuscript are (usually) just providing information to one another.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. The real difference is the audience. If you and I are corresponding one-on-one we can probably keep track of the conversation even if top-posting is ues. If we are corresponding in a public forum (slashdot, usenet, whatever), mailing list or just CCing in multiple people on a technical or business issue Usenet style replies are much easier for outsiders to follow.

This should not be a firing offense

[typical]

Regardless, the person who forwarded these emails to external parties should be fired because company emails shouldn't be forwarded to unintended recipients without original author's consent.

The entire concept of considering all emails at work "business communications" is ridiculous. You ever say something personal to the person in the cubicle next door? Yeah? You ever use your PBX to talk to the person down the hall? Email is just the modern way of doing that.

Now, granted, they shouldn't have got in a spat, but a *firing offense*? That's absolutely absurd. What actual damage did they cause the firm, maybe an hour of wasted time on each of their parts?

Now, I can understand people being concerned about massive goofing off at work -- Slashdot, email, and so forth make it easy for that to be an issue. But expecting *no* personal communication at work is ridiculous. I don't cease being a human when I'm at work -- you can expect me to be working the strong majority of the time, but if you don't expect me to comment on, say, Katrina to co-workers, you want robots working for you, not humans.

Finally, having your lunch stolen is a real pisser -- I remember when I was working at a research firm and someone (would have had to have been at least a thirty-year-old, and most people there were more like sixty) who had to have been making a pretty significant chunk of change swiped one of the sandwiches from my lunch. I was pretty pissed -- there's no real way to defend your lunch in a common fridge -- and while I didn't send out an email asking for reimbursement, I can understand being as pissed as she was.

Why didn't they just sit down with the secretaries, have 'em shake hands and make up, tell 'em not to CC lots of people or make personal attacks, and let them get back to work? It's just ridiculous. Every now and then in their life, people get pissed off enough to do stupid things. Most of them, fortunately, are not in a situation to do something stupid, but these ones were. So now, instead of the company having two experienced secretaries who won't get in flamewars again, they're going to have to go hire two new people. Great.

There are times when you want to fire someone -- when that person is just not suited to work at the company. However, this smells awfully like a knee-jerk from some guy upstairs -- and that's not good management.

As a manger...

[argStyopa]

As usual, there is probably a LOT more to the story.

As a manager, such a tepid 'flamewar' hardly rates my attention, much less the actual FIRING of two full time employees. Please. People have personalities, and they won't always be a wonderful happy always-loving bonded group of soulmates. Sometimes they'll fight, sometimes they'll fight over really, really STUPID things.

But to fire them?

I'd have them both in my office, show them the now-public email, and discuss with them the appropriate use of email and work time. Maybe I'd make a little issue over the embarrassment to the company of the public email. It probably wouldn't hurt to remind them that company emails are monitored, and theirs in particular would be up for scrutiny.

I'd also make a departmental or, (if I was high enough in the management) companywide point about the forwarding of obviously personal emails of others. I agree with the posters here that the schmuck that forwarded it 'out' is also a bit culpable.

But FIRING them? That's overreacting entirely, IMO.

Re:As a manger...

[aXis100]

I think there's more to this than you realise.

Australia has pretty strict laws around "unfair dismissal", making it tough for employers to sack someone for just being bad at their job, unsociable, personality clash etc.

Chances are there was other motives, and this was just a good formal excuse.

Re:As a manger...

[werewolf1031]

A tad off-topic, but...

Australia has pretty strict laws around "unfair dismissal", making it tough for employers to sack someone for just being bad at their job...

Um, I don't know how things are in other countries (ie. just a "dumb Yank"), but here in the U.S., being bad at one's job is a damn good reason for termination. Seriously, if I'm not doing my job right, I can expect to be canned, and I should be. That's not unfair, it's sensible.

Re:mod this +5

[N3WBI3]

You have put your finger on the problem precisely (though I would tend to think that this primarily a south-westerm US problem.

NOLA is south east US, not south west. The problems in NOLA were due to the culture of entitlement, and lack of personal responsibility that the new deal has created among the poorest of the US. Hell there are poverty advocates who say that looting it ok because they are poor. This was not in response to food and water this is while they were watching a clip of a guy stealing stuff from a high end electronics store. If looting is OK because they are poor why not violence against another person.

we all have poor politicians, though few of us have whole police forces that run

NO and LA are the most poorly run state/major city in the Union and its been that way for some time. The best example is a parking lot full of flooded busses that could have been used in the hours before the storm hit (or the levees broke) to get some more people out of there.

On top vs. below

[aclarke]

Hmm, I dunno. I've been using email for, ohh, 14 or so years now so I'm hardly a newcomer to the concept. I think it makes a lot more sense to reply to a message at the top. After all, that's where you start when you read. Why not have the most recent message there instead of having to scroll to the bottom, only to find that the latest response was long and you need to scroll back up again? No thanks.

At least one of my friends tries to make this a Unix versus Microsoft Windows holy war, but I set my mail client to reply at the top no matter which one I'm using, because it makes sense to me and apparently to almost everyone else who uses email too.

Sometimes people have ideas and improve how things are done. Just because it's new and different doesn't mean it's worse. I think this is one of those occasions.

OK thanks I'm done now ;-)

Re:On top vs. below

[clarkcox3]

I believe that the rationale is that when reading a long, top-posted conversation, everything is in a jumbled, psuedo-reverse order:

Answer 4
> Answer 3
> Question 4
>>Answer 2
>>Question 3
>>>Answer 1
>>>Question 2
>>>>Question 1

While, when reading a bottom-posted conversation, everything reads in the correct order, where the answer to a particular question appears directly after said question. (i.e. like a transcript of a real conversation):

>>>>Question 1
>>> Answer 1
>>> Question 2
>> Answer 2
>> Question 3
> Answer 3
> Question 4
Answer 4