How in the world did this get modded as flamebait? It's a real solution to a real problem (make sure all of your workers are in the same general time zone). Come on moderators, stop modding people down just because an answer doesn't sound politically correct.
No, Extreme Programming can't help anything except to drive decent/good programmers crazy, support lazy/untalented programmers, and cut everyone's productivity in half (or worse).
From experience with both, I highly recommend Scrum over XP any day of the week. I still hate Scrum (if I wanted to spend all of my time in meetings, I'd have become an accountant intsead of a programmer), but it's far better than XP.
That's just off the top of my head. I think that you have a reality distortion field. It's common among racist idiots.
What a shame. You started off with a very informed argument that might actually have swayed someone's opinion. Then you took it to a childish, personal level with "idiots" and lost any credibility you had gained.
Not taking the initiative to include her could be interpreted as sexual harassment. This is because sexual harassment is defined as anything that makes someone feel harassed.
Technically, I think you're probably right. I've never seen anyone brought up on a complaint or fired for not talking/interacting with someone though... I suppose it's never too late to start.
Just treat her as a normal person, and sometimes also as a woman (noticing new haircut and whatever), no harrasment in that.
Bzzzz! Wrong. Noticing anything like a haircut or new clothes is usually a bullet point on harassment policies. Never ever ever ever notice a haircut unless you're looking to get fired.
There is a huge double-standard in the workplace today that shows no sign of going away. Until it's done away with, women will find themselves isolated in the workplace. In the end, if women want to be accepted as "one of the guys" then they can't go crying to management every time someone might notice they have bumps in different places.
Exactly. If a woman wants to be included in something at work (chat at the water cooler, lunch, beers after work), she has to take the first step. It's way too dangerous for men to be open and friendly right now. The company-mandated sexual harassment training that most of us have to endure makes it very clear that there doesn't even have to be any truth behind an accusation. If a complaint is filed, odds are that the poor guy is losing his job. No man with a family is willing to risk that, no matter how much it would make the team mesh better, or how much he feels bad for being a jerk, or how much he's just a friendly person. The workplace (in the USA, anyway) is dangerous right now.
As for the rampant fear of harassment suits... this must be an american thing. The legal system is still a joke here in Canada, and we do take sexual harassment seriously, but it's not like people are afraid to ask co-workers to lunch. How is that harassment? It's not.
It doesn't matter if it's actually harassment. All that matters is that a female *saw* it as harassment. That's honestly all it takes for a male to get fired in the USA now.
I personally don't believe it's as messed up as you (and others) say. But even if it is, take a stand people! Avoiding women will not fix the issue. That's like sticking your head in the sand and hoping the lion can't see you.
Fixing a problem this far out of control requires martyrs, and I'm not about to lose my job to try and "make a difference". I don't think "social improvement" is something my children can eat.
I'm not trolling or flaming here, but is there somewhere that the percentage is published? It seems like it would be fairly simple to figure out from the web logs, but since I don't have access to those I'll have to rely on someone else's number.
That was the one! They also had a version that started out looking like a McD's commercial (although I suspected it might not be based on the earlier "Wendy's" commercial). That was good advertising. I watched. Not only did I watch, but I watched it twice because seeing the guy get thrown across the desk was funny. If more commercials were like that, I'd watch more.
Yeah, I tend to argue just for the sake of the argument sometimes, too.
I agree that the tampon is an extreme example, but it's one that sticks out in my brain as the most irritating. I don't have much against the matress or shoe commercial (although I do think Nike should be kicked in the shin for having such stupid commercials). Those are products that I might at some point be interested in. I can promise with 100% certainty that I'll never be interested in buying tampons (or any other feminine product). And by the time I'm ready to buy elderly mobility products the current brands aren't likely to matter. If I can at least continue to skip the commercials that hold absolutely no value (even potential value), I'll be moderately happy.
If Tampax ran a commercial like that, I'd have to seriously reconsider my no-tampon-purchase policy. Even if I didn't need them at the time, I'd have to give money to the company just for having the backbone to put a commercial like that on the air.
I'm not really sure we're talking about the same thing here. I don't disagree that advertising does have an impact. It's very clearly documented that it does. I don't, however, think that all advertising does. I simply don't care about a tampon commercial because I simply don't have any use for a tampon. Any tampon, of any brand. Therefore, tampon advertisements have no impact on me. It's a waste of my time to watch them, and it's a waste of their money to make me watch them.
A car commercial isn't about getting information about the cars that are out there. It's about local (and semi-local) dealerships being able to inform me what their prices on the specific model(s) in which I'm interested. "Van XYZ gets 5 stars in the frontal crash test rating" is pretty meaningless in a commercial. But "come on down this weekend with a written offer from another dealership and we'll beat the price by $200" was worth the 30 seconds it took to watch the ad.
They may convince me that I absolutely need the newest brand of breakfast cereal. They may convince me that my life is empty unless I'm drinking the new flavor of sports drink. But nobody, anywhere, will ever convince me that I need feminine itch cream. They're just wasting their money thinking I'll ever buy that.
In the case of buying a car, it can tell me who in my area is running the best sale on the car(s) I'm specifically looking for. It's a terrible idea to buy a car just based on what you see in a commercial, but if you've already narrowed the choice down to one or two specific models, knowing what the general pricing in your area (or in my case, a much larger mid-state area) looks like can be a big benefit.
That's a good point, unfortunately. Faced with either being forced to watch commercials that are of no interest to me or filling out a brief profile on my DVR so that some commercials are automatically skipped, I personally would pick the second. I'm sure that there are people who would still have a problem with an opt-in system, though. And I'm not even thrilled about it. I can manage my own commercial skipping. But if they're going to disable it anyway, I may as well at least have some say on what I have to watch.
I wish people in the advertising industry would get your point. There are commercials that I rewind to watch, especially if it's something I'm interested in buying. When I was in the market for a new car, I payed attention to nearly every car commercial I saw. But now I'm not in the market for a new car, and frankly don't care what kind of 4th of July sale is going on down at my local car dealership. I don't care about feminine itch products. I don't care that more moms pick brand X of juice box because it's better for growing kids. What I *did* watch was a commercial last night about Arby's having all natural chicken (compared to the other major fast food restrauants). I *do* care about the new brand of breakfast sausage made with maple syrup. Those commercials I watch, and frequently even rewind so I can see the whole thing. But *please* let me skip the tampon commercial. I don't use tampons, I don't want tampons, I'm not going to buy tampons.
A three week public flame war? Incidents like this are why I have a hard time selling Linux as something other than a "high school kid" operating system. Regardless of the reasons behind it, there are much better ways to handle it than a flame war, let alone one that lasts three weeks.
Unfortunately, I *know* that standards are the right answer for our customer. One of the early guidelines for our project was to develop it in.NET, but only to the extent that it could also be compiled and run with Mono. The reason what that some of the organizations we were targeting with our application were non-Microsoft shops.
This drive to make everything work with IE and forget everything else in no way stems from what's best for the customer. It stems from my boss refusing to use anything except IE and wanting the app to look pretty on *her* screen.
There are a few minor differences between IE and Firefox when it comes to alignment, stretching elements, and what each considers 100% of "an element's container". In some cases, the problem is clearly IE (because Firefox and others all render the same way (and correctly). My boss believes that all of our customers will either be using IE by default, or will at least have access to IE and can be told to use it with our application.
That's clearly not a view I share. But nobody really cares what I think.
This very topic is the source of a constant argument between me and my boss. I work to make our product adhere to the standard, even if it means leaving out some nifty interface tweak. My boss wants me to *strive* for IE-only.
Didn't need the pink background to know this was a joke. I mean, come on. It's Duke Nukem Forever. The day it actually is released, the world will come to an end.
Slashdot Mirror
How in the world did this get modded as flamebait? It's a real solution to a real problem (make sure all of your workers are in the same general time zone). Come on moderators, stop modding people down just because an answer doesn't sound politically correct.
(Now prove my point by modding me down as well.)
Maybe Extreme Progamming can help.
No, Extreme Programming can't help anything except to drive decent/good programmers crazy, support lazy/untalented programmers, and cut everyone's productivity in half (or worse).
From experience with both, I highly recommend Scrum over XP any day of the week. I still hate Scrum (if I wanted to spend all of my time in meetings, I'd have become an accountant intsead of a programmer), but it's far better than XP.
That's just off the top of my head. I think that you have a reality distortion field. It's common among racist idiots.
What a shame. You started off with a very informed argument that might actually have swayed someone's opinion. Then you took it to a childish, personal level with "idiots" and lost any credibility you had gained.
Not taking the initiative to include her could be interpreted as sexual harassment. This is because sexual harassment is defined as anything that makes someone feel harassed.
Technically, I think you're probably right. I've never seen anyone brought up on a complaint or fired for not talking/interacting with someone though... I suppose it's never too late to start.
Just treat her as a normal person, and sometimes also as a woman (noticing new haircut and whatever), no harrasment in that.
Bzzzz! Wrong. Noticing anything like a haircut or new clothes is usually a bullet point on harassment policies. Never ever ever ever notice a haircut unless you're looking to get fired.
There is a huge double-standard in the workplace today that shows no sign of going away. Until it's done away with, women will find themselves isolated in the workplace. In the end, if women want to be accepted as "one of the guys" then they can't go crying to management every time someone might notice they have bumps in different places.
Exactly. If a woman wants to be included in something at work (chat at the water cooler, lunch, beers after work), she has to take the first step. It's way too dangerous for men to be open and friendly right now. The company-mandated sexual harassment training that most of us have to endure makes it very clear that there doesn't even have to be any truth behind an accusation. If a complaint is filed, odds are that the poor guy is losing his job. No man with a family is willing to risk that, no matter how much it would make the team mesh better, or how much he feels bad for being a jerk, or how much he's just a friendly person. The workplace (in the USA, anyway) is dangerous right now.
As for the rampant fear of harassment suits... this must be an american thing. The legal system is still a joke here in Canada, and we do take sexual harassment seriously, but it's not like people are afraid to ask co-workers to lunch. How is that harassment? It's not.
It doesn't matter if it's actually harassment. All that matters is that a female *saw* it as harassment. That's honestly all it takes for a male to get fired in the USA now.
I personally don't believe it's as messed up as you (and others) say. But even if it is, take a stand people! Avoiding women will not fix the issue. That's like sticking your head in the sand and hoping the lion can't see you.
Fixing a problem this far out of control requires martyrs, and I'm not about to lose my job to try and "make a difference". I don't think "social improvement" is something my children can eat.
I'm not trolling or flaming here, but is there somewhere that the percentage is published? It seems like it would be fairly simple to figure out from the web logs, but since I don't have access to those I'll have to rely on someone else's number.
That was the one! They also had a version that started out looking like a McD's commercial (although I suspected it might not be based on the earlier "Wendy's" commercial). That was good advertising. I watched. Not only did I watch, but I watched it twice because seeing the guy get thrown across the desk was funny. If more commercials were like that, I'd watch more.
Yeah, I tend to argue just for the sake of the argument sometimes, too.
I agree that the tampon is an extreme example, but it's one that sticks out in my brain as the most irritating. I don't have much against the matress or shoe commercial (although I do think Nike should be kicked in the shin for having such stupid commercials). Those are products that I might at some point be interested in. I can promise with 100% certainty that I'll never be interested in buying tampons (or any other feminine product). And by the time I'm ready to buy elderly mobility products the current brands aren't likely to matter. If I can at least continue to skip the commercials that hold absolutely no value (even potential value), I'll be moderately happy.
If Tampax ran a commercial like that, I'd have to seriously reconsider my no-tampon-purchase policy. Even if I didn't need them at the time, I'd have to give money to the company just for having the backbone to put a commercial like that on the air.
I'm not really sure we're talking about the same thing here. I don't disagree that advertising does have an impact. It's very clearly documented that it does. I don't, however, think that all advertising does. I simply don't care about a tampon commercial because I simply don't have any use for a tampon. Any tampon, of any brand. Therefore, tampon advertisements have no impact on me. It's a waste of my time to watch them, and it's a waste of their money to make me watch them.
A car commercial isn't about getting information about the cars that are out there. It's about local (and semi-local) dealerships being able to inform me what their prices on the specific model(s) in which I'm interested. "Van XYZ gets 5 stars in the frontal crash test rating" is pretty meaningless in a commercial. But "come on down this weekend with a written offer from another dealership and we'll beat the price by $200" was worth the 30 seconds it took to watch the ad.
They may convince me that I absolutely need the newest brand of breakfast cereal. They may convince me that my life is empty unless I'm drinking the new flavor of sports drink. But nobody, anywhere, will ever convince me that I need feminine itch cream. They're just wasting their money thinking I'll ever buy that.
In the case of buying a car, it can tell me who in my area is running the best sale on the car(s) I'm specifically looking for. It's a terrible idea to buy a car just based on what you see in a commercial, but if you've already narrowed the choice down to one or two specific models, knowing what the general pricing in your area (or in my case, a much larger mid-state area) looks like can be a big benefit.
That's a good point, unfortunately. Faced with either being forced to watch commercials that are of no interest to me or filling out a brief profile on my DVR so that some commercials are automatically skipped, I personally would pick the second. I'm sure that there are people who would still have a problem with an opt-in system, though. And I'm not even thrilled about it. I can manage my own commercial skipping. But if they're going to disable it anyway, I may as well at least have some say on what I have to watch.
Not since my college days...
I wish people in the advertising industry would get your point. There are commercials that I rewind to watch, especially if it's something I'm interested in buying. When I was in the market for a new car, I payed attention to nearly every car commercial I saw. But now I'm not in the market for a new car, and frankly don't care what kind of 4th of July sale is going on down at my local car dealership. I don't care about feminine itch products. I don't care that more moms pick brand X of juice box because it's better for growing kids. What I *did* watch was a commercial last night about Arby's having all natural chicken (compared to the other major fast food restrauants). I *do* care about the new brand of breakfast sausage made with maple syrup. Those commercials I watch, and frequently even rewind so I can see the whole thing. But *please* let me skip the tampon commercial. I don't use tampons, I don't want tampons, I'm not going to buy tampons.
A three week public flame war? Incidents like this are why I have a hard time selling Linux as something other than a "high school kid" operating system. Regardless of the reasons behind it, there are much better ways to handle it than a flame war, let alone one that lasts three weeks.
Unfortunately, I *know* that standards are the right answer for our customer. One of the early guidelines for our project was to develop it in .NET, but only to the extent that it could also be compiled and run with Mono. The reason what that some of the organizations we were targeting with our application were non-Microsoft shops.
This drive to make everything work with IE and forget everything else in no way stems from what's best for the customer. It stems from my boss refusing to use anything except IE and wanting the app to look pretty on *her* screen.
There are a few minor differences between IE and Firefox when it comes to alignment, stretching elements, and what each considers 100% of "an element's container". In some cases, the problem is clearly IE (because Firefox and others all render the same way (and correctly). My boss believes that all of our customers will either be using IE by default, or will at least have access to IE and can be told to use it with our application.
That's clearly not a view I share. But nobody really cares what I think.
This very topic is the source of a constant argument between me and my boss. I work to make our product adhere to the standard, even if it means leaving out some nifty interface tweak. My boss wants me to *strive* for IE-only.
I hope the "Nothing for you to see here" message isn't a premonition for the quality of the show...
Didn't need the pink background to know this was a joke. I mean, come on. It's Duke Nukem Forever. The day it actually is released, the world will come to an end.
Step #1 to dismantle the myth of IT being a dead-end career is to actually make it NOT be a dead-end career.
To the six people who think they've got a good IT job right now, have you thought about where that jobs leads you when you're 30? 40? 60?