Well, maybe not your exact job, but close enough. The thing is, you seem to be confusing " friendly, helpful, and responsive" with being their bitch, and "being a bastard" with asserting yourself and your rights.
Here is what I did:
Determine who your boss is. I don't mean any dotted-line bosses, or your "customers". I mean the person that can fire you. If that person is not with in two levels of the CEO, you should start looking for a new job because the IT department is an after-thought.
Get a complete job description and an org chart.
Think about how your job has been for the last 1.5 years. Try to determine why you are not treated with respect. Is it a result of you not standing up for yourself or is it because your boss would over-ride you when you stood up for yourself?
Come up with a plan of action to correct the situation.
Go to your boss, explain the current conditions, and present your plan of action. If your boss is not part of the problem, he will support your plan. If your boss is part of the problem, keep looking for a new job.
Implement the plan or leave for a new job. If you leave explain to everyone above you why you are leaving.
As for the plan of action, consider the following:
You boss needs to stand behind you 100%.
Learn to use the word "no". If someone comes to you and wants something unreasonable, use the word. If they get upset, send them to your boss, who should ask them "What did the IT guy say?" and then he should repeat your answer to them. See #1.
If they are rude to you, call them on it. Tell them you there to help them, but you do not have to put up with abuse. If they persist, take their computer back to the shop and tell them you will bring it back when it is fixed. If they complain, See #1.
Enforce your "pretty liberal policies", to the letter. If you have input or control the policies, make them less liberal and put some teeth into the penalties. Then, apply those penalties. Oh, and it might not hurt to make an example, possibly public example, of someone who constantly violates the policies. See #1.
If someone comes to you with a complex project, give them a reasonable time frame for completion. If they demand it be done sooner claiming it is an emergency or that they need it done, remember that a lack of planning on their part does not constitute an emergency on yours. Explain to them that you have other projects, some more important than theirs, that are ahead of their project and their project will take time as it is complex. If they don't like it, see #1.
As you can see, this requires that your boss stand behind you and back you 100%. If not, then you are better off finding a new job. But, even if your boss will over-ride you every single time, you are better off pushing problems up the chain of command. Eventually, they will stop coming to you and start going to your boss. Then, you can turn to your boss and say "Which of these four 'important projects that have to done before everything else', do you want me to do first?" You can force your boss to set priorities and then when people come asking about their oh so important projects, you can say "My boss said I am to work on these projects in this order. Your project is number y, I am on x." and if they don't like it point them back to the boss.
If you haven't gathered yet, the objective is to either get the authority you need to assert yourself and your rights, or force everything to go through your boss and make him deal with them while you look for a new and better job.
That shithead didn't even come close to providing the information. All he did was spout his ignorant opinion and then point to a website with some numbers made up by another ignorant dumbass that didn't even begin to list all the costs associated with sending SMS messags. He didn'teven try to get real information. If he wants to jump into this with lies and ignorance, I will treat him like the stupid asshole he is. And, I will do the same, or worse to you.
There are those of us that intercept and redirect cell transmissions because of the absurdly high costs of everything. Why use cell minutes when you can create your own mini-tower and use your internal PBX? Many companies are investing many thousands of dollars in equipment because it pays off fast.
You say it is cheaper to buy or build one's own "mini-tower" and intercept and redirect cell transmissions to one's own internal PBX. That means you have a cost-benefit analysis handy complete that shows hardware and software costs, operational costs, licensing costs, along with any savings. And, you should have some case studies as well. So, let's see them along with a list of all the companies you can name that done as you say. That should be a fairly long list for it to qualify as many.
And, while we are at it, you can explain how the people using the private "mini-towers" are sending SMS, which is what this whole thread is about.
Well, shithead, I do know how they work, because I work in the industry. Do you?
Oh, and that article you linked to, it is wrong. I notice he left out about 90% of the costs of a text message, and if you worked in the industry you would know that.
Until you want to answer the fucking question, shut the fuck up.
Again, your solution to crime is to get rid of the law. Yet, you don't want to get rid of the laws that others want to get rid of. That makes you a hypocrite.
You are just another stupid, selfish, arrogant shithead who does not want to follow the law and does not want to get punished for following the law.
If I had my way, it would be open season on dirtbag junkies like you. You need to die, and if you have bred, your worthless offspring needs to die too.
You must be stupid because you could not describe or answer questions about the subject you decided to talk about. Maybe you should educate your ignorant self before proving it to the world, dumbshit.
For suggesting that if you want to outlaw the ability of people to protect their copyright, you should also put teeth into the laws that protect their copyright?
I would only support this if violating copyright was criminalized. Otherwise, law only penalizes people who try to protect their copyright. For what you suggest to be fair, the law also has to have an incentive to not violate the copyright of the ones that don't use DRM.
Just because he's living on college premises doesn't make him a slave to their Internet policy.
No, using the their, meaning the college's, internet servoce makes him a slave to their internet policy. If he does not want to comply with the policy under which the internet service, then he does not have to use their internet service.
Yes, I have. Have you heard of your own government? You know, the one of the people, by the people, for the people?
Oh, wait, I forgot, you believe that your will and beliefs should be substituted for theirs like every other petty tyrant. That is why you are an asshole.
Without the initial illegal act, which no one need do, there would be no further acts. It is irrelevant that what you believe to be a non-harmful action has been made illegal. The fact is that it is illegal. The fact is that they should not be doing it and if they were not doing, no harm would result AT ALL.
You post is hilarious. It is obvious you don't know the Constitution and definitely don't know the history of the drug laws. You REALLY need to get your information from some where other than pro-drug abuse sites.
Wow, major logic failure on your part. All may have been law of the land, but the law was changed and interestingly enough, most of those laws were changed by the government against the wishes of a minority of the people. They were not changed by a minority of the people against the will and wishes of the majority of people and the government.
Putting the drug debate aside, online polls always suffer from two things:
biased sample and hasty generalization
A poll at WhiteHouse.gov merely reflects the opinion of those who visited WhiteHouse.gov--nothing more and nothing less. A poll at cnn.com or foxnews.com merely reflects the opinions of those who visit those sites--nothing more and nothing less. It doesn't matter how popular the online poll is... THEY CANNOT BE GENERALIZED TO THE US POPULATION AT LARGE. And it would be unwise for an administration to make policy decisions based on informal online polls.
That's why we have the voting system. Those who vote represent legal US citizens who chose to exercise their constitutional right to vote--nothing more, nothing less.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, maybe not your exact job, but close enough. The thing is, you seem to be confusing " friendly, helpful, and responsive" with being their bitch, and "being a bastard" with asserting yourself and your rights.
Here is what I did:
As for the plan of action, consider the following:
As you can see, this requires that your boss stand behind you and back you 100%. If not, then you are better off finding a new job. But, even if your boss will over-ride you every single time, you are better off pushing problems up the chain of command. Eventually, they will stop coming to you and start going to your boss. Then, you can turn to your boss and say "Which of these four 'important projects that have to done before everything else', do you want me to do first?" You can force your boss to set priorities and then when people come asking about their oh so important projects, you can say "My boss said I am to work on these projects in this order. Your project is number y, I am on x." and if they don't like it point them back to the boss.
If you haven't gathered yet, the objective is to either get the authority you need to assert yourself and your rights, or force everything to go through your boss and make him deal with them while you look for a new and better job.
You must be new here.
What are you, stupid?
That shithead didn't even come close to providing the information. All he did was spout his ignorant opinion and then point to a website with some numbers made up by another ignorant dumbass that didn't even begin to list all the costs associated with sending SMS messags. He didn'teven try to get real information. If he wants to jump into this with lies and ignorance, I will treat him like the stupid asshole he is. And, I will do the same, or worse to you.
You say it is cheaper to buy or build one's own "mini-tower" and intercept and redirect cell transmissions to one's own internal PBX. That means you have a cost-benefit analysis handy complete that shows hardware and software costs, operational costs, licensing costs, along with any savings. And, you should have some case studies as well. So, let's see them along with a list of all the companies you can name that done as you say. That should be a fairly long list for it to qualify as many.
And, while we are at it, you can explain how the people using the private "mini-towers" are sending SMS, which is what this whole thread is about.
Do as I said or admit you are an ignorant shithead and shut the fuck up. As of now, those are you only two options, dumbass.
Well, shithead, I do know how they work, because I work in the industry. Do you?
Oh, and that article you linked to, it is wrong. I notice he left out about 90% of the costs of a text message, and if you worked in the industry you would know that.
Until you want to answer the fucking question, shut the fuck up.
Again, your solution to crime is to get rid of the law. Yet, you don't want to get rid of the laws that others want to get rid of. That makes you a hypocrite.
You are just another stupid, selfish, arrogant shithead who does not want to follow the law and does not want to get punished for following the law.
If I had my way, it would be open season on dirtbag junkies like you. You need to die, and if you have bred, your worthless offspring needs to die too.
Please do so now, in detail, with references containing verifiable data on the costs.
You must be stupid because you could not describe or answer questions about the subject you decided to talk about. Maybe you should educate your ignorant self before proving it to the world, dumbshit.
If it were, then the police would be arresting people and there would be criminal instead of civil cases.
Murder? Is that the only crime you can come up with, dumbshit? How about treating it theft? Oh, wait, then it doesn't sound stupid.
You claim their business model is unsound.
Please describe in detail their business model and how you would improve it or replace it.
Flaimbait?
For suggesting that if you want to outlaw the ability of people to protect their copyright, you should also put teeth into the laws that protect their copyright?
It is amazing how hypocritical of you.
I would only support this if violating copyright was criminalized. Otherwise, law only penalizes people who try to protect their copyright. For what you suggest to be fair, the law also has to have an incentive to not violate the copyright of the ones that don't use DRM.
I will support outlawing DRM just as soon as the many slashdotters out there support criminalizing violating copyright.
No, using the their, meaning the college's, internet servoce makes him a slave to their internet policy. If he does not want to comply with the policy under which the internet service, then he does not have to use their internet service.
Don't use the university's network.
Problem solved.
How does a lie get modded insightful?
That sound you just heard were a thousand fanboys lighting their flamethrowers.
Yes, I have. Have you heard of your own government? You know, the one of the people, by the people, for the people?
Oh, wait, I forgot, you believe that your will and beliefs should be substituted for theirs like every other petty tyrant. That is why you are an asshole.
Without the initial illegal act, which no one need do, there would be no further acts. It is irrelevant that what you believe to be a non-harmful action has been made illegal. The fact is that it is illegal. The fact is that they should not be doing it and if they were not doing, no harm would result AT ALL.
You post is hilarious. It is obvious you don't know the Constitution and definitely don't know the history of the drug laws. You REALLY need to get your information from some where other than pro-drug abuse sites.
Wow, major logic failure on your part. All may have been law of the land, but the law was changed and interestingly enough, most of those laws were changed by the government against the wishes of a minority of the people. They were not changed by a minority of the people against the will and wishes of the majority of people and the government.
There, fixed that for you.
I see, so you do believe that the will of the many should be subjugated to the will of the few or one. Nice to know that, asshole.
If slavery was the will of the majority, it would never have been outlawed. Your argument fails, dumbass.
No, it isn't. As someone else has said: