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.

OMGLOL

[BlackMesaLabs]

BANNED!!! OLOLO

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.

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*.

Aight

[ReformedExCon]

I put on my robe and wizard hat.

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

[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: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

Slashdot

[circletimessquare]

News from Fark. Stuff that doesn't matter.

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

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...

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?

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: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.

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:You forgot!

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, dead horse beats YOU!

Re:Ouch

[Anonymous Coward]

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

best misspelling of loser ever!

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: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.

A more detailed pic

[colonic]

This pic is less blurry.

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.

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.