Thanks for the clarification, I couldn't remember all the details around the story.
Bear with me for a minute, so what if the scenario was more like I initially thought - one player (an evil character) in-game, making up some remarks or story about raping another player (a good character) in-game? Do you think that's acceptable role-playing, maybe just in bad taste, or, over the line and reason for some form of censure?
It's an interesting situation, I think the definition of role-playing can be quite different for many people.
I'll take the woman's side, since most people are either making a case against her point, or just flame-baiting.
Are there any boundaries in role-playing? Some people seem to say no. Well, what if someone dresses up for an SCA event or Halloween as some offensive type character, and starts going off on someone in way most people would view as inappropriate (say, a person in a KKK costume and using the "n" word towards blacks/african-americans, etc.) Is that ok?
Since we don't live in ancient egypt, should we behave by today's standards in-game -- totally, partially, or not at all? Does role playing imply total immersion in character, or are there limits?
I also acceptable behavior should be very clearly defined so players know what to expect. I'm not well informed about the game, but I'd be curious what their policy states.
There was an incident years ago in EQ I think where someone playing a Dark Elf, either roleplayed or wrote about raping another in-game character (not a NPC, it was a PC acct). I recall it was quite graphic and, to me anyway, disturbing. I believe the player was banned, some said it was role-playing, others said it crossed the line. Was a huge debate. Thoughts?
Ok, some stuff to mull over -- I think it's an interesting topic as mmorpgs and rpgs continue to get more interesting and immersive.
I think since the mmorpg market became so saturated - and highly competitive, the companies producing them are notorious for 'vapor features'. They all promise the game to be everything to everyone, but by the time it's released, what's delivered often falls very short. Or worse, they promise it in a later patch or expansion, which still often never comes.
I didn't play SWG, but heard lots of complaints for friends who played about missing features, and promptly quit. I've played EQ, DAoC and CoH, and they were all guilty of it to varying degrees.
I think a lot of mmorpg fanboys default response to this is "It's a work in progress, you need to be patient, they need to develop their story arc". I call bullshit on that, when I pay $40-50 for a game, then $10-15 a month subscription, I want it full featured from Day 1, not Day 180 or Day 365.
I've been watching WoW and EQ2 for this, so far from the friends in both the betas, it sounds like WoW is delivering the features promised more than EQ2 is. We'll see.
As one friend said, don't sell me a car, and then tell me the seats and tires will come later; or worse, are part of an additional package I need to pay for - when it should be standard equipment.
"If I can buy the same product for less, is it in my best interest to buy it for more?"
You missed my point. Sure if you want to buy the latest trendy bestseller, you can get it cheaper at a box store. BUT when you want the hard to find book, or some unique title from a small press, good luck.
The small presses are not supported by the large chain stores, so when the small presses go under because people buy from the uber store instead of the small indie store, you ultimately have LESS choices in the long run, not more, b/c now those titles are gone forever.
And it's already happening, there are only about 4 major publishers now, you may think there's more but they're just a variety of names under the same corporations. There's only about 1/2 the independent bookstores than there were 10 years ago, and to someone who knows the industry a bit - trust me, there's less to choose from now b/c people have bought solely on price, and not realized the impact.
In the short run, you save a few bucks, in the long run you have less choices as publishers and distributers becoming fewer and fewer. And guess what, just like the MS monopoly the people here hate so much - those left standing are already exercising questionable business practices since there's fewer voices to raise an alarm.
"Most independent stores I have gone to shop for music in are charing $16+ for a CD. If you're buying it for $12 and making $4+ a CD I seriously believe that you are gouging us. I don't feel bad for you."
After college I worked at a great independent bookstore for about 3 1/2 years, just at Burns Ignoble (Barnes & Noble) was starting to drop store everywhere.
More than once UPS, USPS, etc dropped off the wrong box in the shipping room, intended for B&N, we'd be opening boxes quickly usually and didn't always notice until we looked at the invoice. The discount a place like B&N gets over the independent is significant, like 8-12% more. This is a similiar situation with record stores.
When you're running close margins to begin with and your comptetitor is getting stock for 8-12% less than you, THAT's huge, and it's d*mn hard to compete. Sadly, that bookstore, after 45 years in business, closed this summer.
Also before you complain about costs, think about what independent media places (records & books) tend to offer; people who love their product, are knowledgeable about it, and MOST importantly, they support small presses/publishers/labels than the uber stores won't touch (including Target by the way, not just Wal-mart)
As independent record and book stored closes, so do the many small presses & labels. The store I worked at bought some great books from indie pubs, many of those are now out of business since Target, Wal-Mart and the like won't even talk to them. Those books are no longer available and those people lost their jobs.
Seriously, thing hard about where you buy things. Yes, I understand $2-3 more is a lot to some people, however, you are ultimately reducing your the choices and varieties of the music you hear and books you read. Sometimes being a consumer involves more than just the price of an item.
"If jammers become accepted in cinemas, theatres and churches, they may well spread to restaurants, galleries, museums, shops, cafés, pubs, stations, workplaces..."
And this is a bad thing how? I can see work/pub access for obvious reason, there's no real expectation of silence/quiet. But as for the rest of it, fine block em all.
If you are expecting some important call, or HAVE to have your phone on, then maybe you shouldn't be at the theater, restaurant, or museum. You DON'T have any right to 24/7 cell access; when I pay to go into a museum or enjoy a meal at a restaurant I don't want to be force to hear some jackasses conversation, 99% of time of which it's NOT in any way, shape, or form an emergency or even important (to anyone but the self-absorbed cell phone user)
While I agree it's best to fight the behavior, the reality is some people are rude, absent-minded or just plain assholes, and will leave their phones or pagers on, and it will interrupt someone else's movie, dining, etc experience. So I say a big 'screw you' to those people, if you can't be considerate of others, then no cell access for you - too bad, so sad.
Yes, I'm pissed off, I'm sick of people being so self-absorbed (not referring to poster, but people in general), that they think their lives and activities count more than mine or someone else's; and happily interrupt or intrude upon my own without considering anyone around them.
If people showed some common courtesy and respect, this wouldn't be an issue, but since they don't, technological enforcement is fine in my book.
"The reason that Micro$oft cannot win in this kind of fight is that there is no company paying the salaries of the programmers developing FireFox. It is a volunteer effort."
The is exactly the reason MS is NOT dead. I don't know about you, but I prefer not to work for free, most people don't.
You're assuming Firefox developers will always want to, or be willing to, work for free. That doesn't pay the bills. At some point, people and companies need to make money - though it's terrific people are willing to donate time to something like this, and we need alternatives to IE - I don't think it's the uber-torpedo that will sink MS/IE, no matter how much you dislike them.
"Round 1 and the game goes to FireFox and the open-source movement"
Game goes to Firefox? Huh? I'm sorry, but what world do you live in? Again, put aside your hate of MS and look at it objectively from a pure business perspective, as much as I'm pulling for Opera/FireFox/et al, it's a silly claim.
Guy I know (a friend's friend from college) who's got a slacker personality to begin with, has been playing EQ non-stop for like 5+ years, basically from whenever it went live.
He's 38 or so, no job, no money, no g/f, no life. Had a back injury while working at UPS several years ago, and uses that as an excuse for everything - somehow he can manage to sit at a PC and play EQ for 7-8 hours a day, but he can't work a deskjob or get through a few college classes? None of us buy it of course, and let him know it.
Lives in his mom's house, mooches off her, she gives him some spending money I guess, and he leeches off friends when he can - I won't give him a f-ing dime, he's perfectly able to work. I lost all respect for the guy, but it's really sad too.
I did play EQ for about 2 years on and off, I can see the addictive aspects to it, but found the tedium too much. Takes forever to accomplish anything, and they continue to move the carrot further and further out as you progess. I think that's part of the addiction, you are required to put more and more into it to get less and less, sounds like crack alright:)
Now I drop a mmorpg as soon as I'm bored with it, screw that 'you got to earn your uber sword of beyotch slapping' -- by camping something for freakin hours on end or giving up a whole day or weekend for some lame ass raid. The never ending treadmills in some of those games are nuts, but it does seem to hook many people.
I've done f/t perm and contract work. I have zero problem leaving those kind of environments, and do. I find large companies are the worst for organizational problems.
I agree with you than in an ideal world you could go to management of some sort and get the situation fixed. But in my experience, esp as a contractor, it's usually an uphill battle not worth fighting if it's problem with the company's culture.
If the culture is screwed up, I politely decline a contract extension when the time comes. My job is to design and code, not fixed f*cked up management. I had one 3-month contract where I had 4 different managers in that timeframe, due to political power plays and all kinds of crap, there's no way to as a contractor to correct that kind of situation in that timeframe.
When I was wet behind the ears, I used to try, but it was an exercise in futility, so now I don't bother. I certainly will ask for what I need, but if I can't get it - I just document my requests, cover my a*s, and move on when the time comes.
That's a very common problem unfortunately. I've been a developer for ~10 years, and I still run into it all the time, especially the part of business rules being added/changed once the project is done or nearly done.
Being a junior developer is irrelevant your problem - if you have a good PM, hs/she should be willing to go to bat for your team, and demand functional and technical specs as needed. If not the project will be in jeopardy. If the PM does ask for requirements and doesn't get them, at least it's a CYA situation - and they can say look "get me the info the team needs, or I can't promise what will be delivered"
When you have a PM who isn't willing to do that you're bound to get screwed. Best thing to do is document all your requests for information, and tell the PM, if you want this to project to succeed, like it or not - I need information "x" and "y". If the project is a crash and burn, you can say you did what you were able to provided the information that was given to you - and you weren't given all you requested.
Any company-organization that considers you and 'idiot' for wanting clarification is looking to burn money on a failed project and/or happy to waste resources on lots of bugs fixes and patching. They should look in the mirror before viewing others as idiots.
"Developers are least qualified to validate a business requirement. They're either nerds and don't get it, or they're people in another culture altogether"
Not surprsing that a CEO would make this remark. I can't count the times I've asked the business community I'm working with for clarification of a business rule or requirement, and then get a 'sigh' or other look that says - "I'm too busy to worry about this".
And on the contract I'm working on now, they consider a 30 min phone meeting enough information to build a full blown app - trying to get documentation is like pulling teeth. And of course we know where the finger will be pointed if there's any issues.
To say we're nerds who don't "get it" is just an asinine, condescending remark; a) I'm perfectable able to learn about the business involved, b) If you explain the rules properly most developers I know have no problem at all coding the solution. I find most of the developers I work with brighter than the business community they're working with. The CEOs remark has a dilbert-like quality to it imo, and this guy's one of the 'experts' on the problem in the article... ha!
I wasn't specifically connecting catholicism to biblical literalism, simply making the point that unlike science, religion and religious institutions do have political agendas... look at the what happened between Galileo and the Vatican for example when science pointed out flaws in biblical 'truth' [sic]
"does not get political and kowtow to the liberal viewpoint on things such as Big Bang"
Probably a mindless troll, but I'll bite. WTF !?!? Science is science, period. It's only 'liberal' in the narrow mindset of people who think the earth is 4000 years old, and the fossil record is a trick by god to test someone's faith. It's called liberal because some people get so defensive when it points out the errors in their misguided, fantastical, untestable notions they cling to -- since the universe is too complex or scary to them.
The great thing about science is it doesn't have a preconceived notion to hold onto - if a theory is sound it holds up, if not, it is replaced or adjusted with further testing and observation by the originator or other scientists. Science itself does not have an agenda like an institution such as the vatican does.
Now, trying to teach 'creationism' in schools as anything but pure fiction, THAT'S political.
The one criticism I'd have, not so much of the product itself, but people becoming enamored or worse, dependent on it -- is these kind of things are no replacement for good outdoor skills.
I'm an avid hiker/backpacker, and have run into 'yuppie' types who have their PDAs, GPSs, cell phones etc., with them on their trips; and consider themselves 'experienced' hikers. Problem is they couldn't navigate their way out of a paper bag with a map and compass, let alone tell me what 'mean declination' means.
After college, I worked at an independent bookstore for a bit, including the map department -- once had a hunter looking a topo map, point at the contour lines, and say 'they sure have a lot of roads there'. And to think the man owned a gun...
I do think there's some place for this kind of thing, but it's no replacement for knowledge, esp when you break it or the batteries die or you find yourself needing to think quickly without assistance.
But I'm also something of a purist, I backpack to 'get away from it all' including the digital realm, I really don't want this kind of gadget interfering with my experience. And please people be considerate of others - don't yammer on loudly for 15 min on your damn cell phone when others are trying to enjoy a little peace and enjoy what nature is offering. Thanks.
Given a judge can marry people as legitimately as a religious person, I'm not sure it is by necessity that 'religious based'. Any by religious based, I assume you're implying christian - b/c there are other religions and ceremonies they may see and define married differently. Just because there are more Christians in the US than other religious groups, does not mean it's a Christian nation, regardless of what some try to claim.
The debate obviously in part, is what defines marriage, and who gets to define it? I'm not sure the answer is all that clear.
Yes, people are welcome to follow their faith, but when they impose their views on others (anti-gay legislation et al) then they stepped over the line. If someone's faith requires them to step on my or another's rights, then telling them to back off is not 'narrow-minded', it's protecting my own rights and civil liberties, and often that of persecuted minority groups.
"Because marriage is more about family than it is about affections."
That's YOUR opinion. So does that mean heteros who choose not to, or are not able to have children, are "less" married than a family with 10 kids?
That's an extremely narrow-minded view of marriage, hell, it's a load of sh*t. And if 2 straight people marry because of 'affections', so be it, it isn't any of your or my freakin business. I don't care why they marry.
The implication that 'strong families' only come from straight unions is also crap. Gay or Straight, some couples are healthy and strong, some aren't. I know gay couples who've been together for years, and straight people who are on their 3rd marriage - does that mean anything? No, you just can't judge all relationship with sweeping remarks. You make broad generalizations with nothing to back it up whatsoever.
One concern I have, with the propensity towards lawsuits based around denying personal responsbility - will be people suing left and right over accidents or other mishaps; instead of admitting they screwed up b/c they were on their cell phone, swatting at their kids in the back seat, etc.
"My automatic breaking system failed"
"My distance detention system was faulty"
"The Xtreme Cruise Control X-5000 messed up"
While you might be able to proove/disprove such claims, I can see the suits now. I also worry about people thinking it's ok to be LESS attentive (or worse, sober) because their car will protect them, and other drivers, from their own poor driving.
I'm very much a believer that you should be doing one thing while you in a car - driving; which means 2 hands on the wheel unless you're shifting, and watching the road and other cars - NOT having a business meeting on a cell phone, combing your hair, having dinner, watching a DVD, etc. etc. Cars a big, powerful, fast machines that require full operator attention, at all times, period. [Ok, unless parked, while you're in the backseat with your gf/bf]
I think too many gadgets of convienence will only make driving less safe as drivers become lazier and generally less attentive, if not less skilled.
I mean really, the guy is just churning out revamped versions of the same ol' sh*t time and time again for two reasons 1) money, 2) he has nothing original to offer, his creativity is spent.
I think as time has passed he's clearly gotten worse, not better, like many writers-directors. When's the last time he wrote or directed a good movie? Decades imo; maybe Empire Strikes Back in '80 or Raiders of the Lost Ark in '81? [the 3rd one was ok I guess, 2nd was lame, we'll see about the the 4th]
People are free to buy yet another version of these films, I won't be one of them, in my book - he's wasted any good will and positive feelings I ever had about the SW universe by being the biggest commercial sellout I can think of, and diluting the 'myth' to the point of comedy.
He won't be getting any of my coin, for this or the upcoming SW films - ever since Jar Jar I was done with them. Too bad he ruined such a good thing.
Ummmm... there was plenty of social commentary in the original series. A black female communications officer on the bridge, along with a Chinese-American and a Russian? You don't think that was social commentary, not heavy handed perhaps - but very much a statement, especially given when the original series was filmed
Sure Kirk had his butt kicking episodes, but there was often references to (at the time) contemporary or historical issues. Perhaps because they didn't interest you, you've forgotten them, which is fine, I'm just saying the commentary was clearly there.
I think if you do it without going over the top, being too obvious, too black-n-white or simplistic, social commentary can be very interesting and effective. Personally, I'd get tired of a program that just did action all the time with no context or reference point, that's was FPS's are for:)
Just curious, what part of Canada are you from? I have a friend in Vancouver who seems to think the tech market isn't so bad there.
Reason I ask is I thinking of returning to Canada (in Denver currently), probably BC and didn't get the impression it was proportionately any worse than in the US.
Whoa there pal - there's a world's difference between someone breaking into your car (illegal) or a DUI driver (illegal) and a kid who does something stupid (not violent, not destructive, not a violation of anyone's property or rights) and embarrasses the hell out of herself.
My response to the parent poster is that kids need to be held accountable for their account BUT treated with some respect and a litte understanding for their mistakes. And also that people who say "tough shit" or "too bad" to the geeky, nerdy, outsider kids who are picked on, mocked, or harassed - need to chill out and give them a break.
You made an illogical leap. Do NOT imply that I in anyway condone or accept someone destroying your property or vehicular homicide. That's wrong, they should be prosecuted, and it's not even part of this discussion.
No - " you're a pussy idiot " for flaming someone anonymously, you glutless little prick.
You're right, some of these kids are "severely dysfuctional ", but guess what? They probably got that way for some very complex reasons (I'd be very curious to know about their home lives, experiences, parents) and applauding or relishing in their humilation isn't going to make those kids better people.
Which is why I clearly said in my post, yes, you have to let them learn their lessons, but help them become more intelligent mature adults but also showing some compassion to what can be a very sh*tty, confusing, difficult time in life.
Slashdot Mirror
Bear with me for a minute, so what if the scenario was more like I initially thought - one player (an evil character) in-game, making up some remarks or story about raping another player (a good character) in-game? Do you think that's acceptable role-playing, maybe just in bad taste, or, over the line and reason for some form of censure?
It's an interesting situation, I think the definition of role-playing can be quite different for many people.
Are there any boundaries in role-playing? Some people seem to say no. Well, what if someone dresses up for an SCA event or Halloween as some offensive type character, and starts going off on someone in way most people would view as inappropriate (say, a person in a KKK costume and using the "n" word towards blacks/african-americans, etc.) Is that ok?
Since we don't live in ancient egypt, should we behave by today's standards in-game -- totally, partially, or not at all? Does role playing imply total immersion in character, or are there limits?
I also acceptable behavior should be very clearly defined so players know what to expect. I'm not well informed about the game, but I'd be curious what their policy states.
There was an incident years ago in EQ I think where someone playing a Dark Elf, either roleplayed or wrote about raping another in-game character (not a NPC, it was a PC acct). I recall it was quite graphic and, to me anyway, disturbing. I believe the player was banned, some said it was role-playing, others said it crossed the line. Was a huge debate. Thoughts?
Ok, some stuff to mull over -- I think it's an interesting topic as mmorpgs and rpgs continue to get more interesting and immersive.
I didn't play SWG, but heard lots of complaints for friends who played about missing features, and promptly quit. I've played EQ, DAoC and CoH, and they were all guilty of it to varying degrees.
I think a lot of mmorpg fanboys default response to this is "It's a work in progress, you need to be patient, they need to develop their story arc". I call bullshit on that, when I pay $40-50 for a game, then $10-15 a month subscription, I want it full featured from Day 1, not Day 180 or Day 365.
I've been watching WoW and EQ2 for this, so far from the friends in both the betas, it sounds like WoW is delivering the features promised more than EQ2 is. We'll see.
As one friend said, don't sell me a car, and then tell me the seats and tires will come later; or worse, are part of an additional package I need to pay for - when it should be standard equipment.
You missed my point. Sure if you want to buy the latest trendy bestseller, you can get it cheaper at a box store. BUT when you want the hard to find book, or some unique title from a small press, good luck.
The small presses are not supported by the large chain stores, so when the small presses go under because people buy from the uber store instead of the small indie store, you ultimately have LESS choices in the long run, not more, b/c now those titles are gone forever.
And it's already happening, there are only about 4 major publishers now, you may think there's more but they're just a variety of names under the same corporations. There's only about 1/2 the independent bookstores than there were 10 years ago, and to someone who knows the industry a bit - trust me, there's less to choose from now b/c people have bought solely on price, and not realized the impact.
In the short run, you save a few bucks, in the long run you have less choices as publishers and distributers becoming fewer and fewer. And guess what, just like the MS monopoly the people here hate so much - those left standing are already exercising questionable business practices since there's fewer voices to raise an alarm.
After college I worked at a great independent bookstore for about 3 1/2 years, just at Burns Ignoble (Barnes & Noble) was starting to drop store everywhere.
More than once UPS, USPS, etc dropped off the wrong box in the shipping room, intended for B&N, we'd be opening boxes quickly usually and didn't always notice until we looked at the invoice. The discount a place like B&N gets over the independent is significant, like 8-12% more. This is a similiar situation with record stores.
When you're running close margins to begin with and your comptetitor is getting stock for 8-12% less than you, THAT's huge, and it's d*mn hard to compete. Sadly, that bookstore, after 45 years in business, closed this summer.
Also before you complain about costs, think about what independent media places (records & books) tend to offer; people who love their product, are knowledgeable about it, and MOST importantly, they support small presses/publishers/labels than the uber stores won't touch (including Target by the way, not just Wal-mart)
As independent record and book stored closes, so do the many small presses & labels. The store I worked at bought some great books from indie pubs, many of those are now out of business since Target, Wal-Mart and the like won't even talk to them. Those books are no longer available and those people lost their jobs.
Seriously, thing hard about where you buy things. Yes, I understand $2-3 more is a lot to some people, however, you are ultimately reducing your the choices and varieties of the music you hear and books you read. Sometimes being a consumer involves more than just the price of an item.
My 2 cents
And this is a bad thing how? I can see work/pub access for obvious reason, there's no real expectation of silence/quiet. But as for the rest of it, fine block em all.
If you are expecting some important call, or HAVE to have your phone on, then maybe you shouldn't be at the theater, restaurant, or museum. You DON'T have any right to 24/7 cell access; when I pay to go into a museum or enjoy a meal at a restaurant I don't want to be force to hear some jackasses conversation, 99% of time of which it's NOT in any way, shape, or form an emergency or even important (to anyone but the self-absorbed cell phone user)
While I agree it's best to fight the behavior, the reality is some people are rude, absent-minded or just plain assholes, and will leave their phones or pagers on, and it will interrupt someone else's movie, dining, etc experience. So I say a big 'screw you' to those people, if you can't be considerate of others, then no cell access for you - too bad, so sad.
Yes, I'm pissed off, I'm sick of people being so self-absorbed (not referring to poster, but people in general), that they think their lives and activities count more than mine or someone else's; and happily interrupt or intrude upon my own without considering anyone around them.
If people showed some common courtesy and respect, this wouldn't be an issue, but since they don't, technological enforcement is fine in my book.
The is exactly the reason MS is NOT dead. I don't know about you, but I prefer not to work for free, most people don't.
You're assuming Firefox developers will always want to, or be willing to, work for free. That doesn't pay the bills. At some point, people and companies need to make money - though it's terrific people are willing to donate time to something like this, and we need alternatives to IE - I don't think it's the uber-torpedo that will sink MS/IE, no matter how much you dislike them.
"Round 1 and the game goes to FireFox and the open-source movement"
Game goes to Firefox? Huh? I'm sorry, but what world do you live in? Again, put aside your hate of MS and look at it objectively from a pure business perspective, as much as I'm pulling for Opera/FireFox/et al, it's a silly claim.
He's 38 or so, no job, no money, no g/f, no life. Had a back injury while working at UPS several years ago, and uses that as an excuse for everything - somehow he can manage to sit at a PC and play EQ for 7-8 hours a day, but he can't work a deskjob or get through a few college classes? None of us buy it of course, and let him know it.
Lives in his mom's house, mooches off her, she gives him some spending money I guess, and he leeches off friends when he can - I won't give him a f-ing dime, he's perfectly able to work. I lost all respect for the guy, but it's really sad too.
I did play EQ for about 2 years on and off, I can see the addictive aspects to it, but found the tedium too much. Takes forever to accomplish anything, and they continue to move the carrot further and further out as you progess. I think that's part of the addiction, you are required to put more and more into it to get less and less, sounds like crack alright :)
Now I drop a mmorpg as soon as I'm bored with it, screw that 'you got to earn your uber sword of beyotch slapping' -- by camping something for freakin hours on end or giving up a whole day or weekend for some lame ass raid. The never ending treadmills in some of those games are nuts, but it does seem to hook many people.
I agree with you than in an ideal world you could go to management of some sort and get the situation fixed. But in my experience, esp as a contractor, it's usually an uphill battle not worth fighting if it's problem with the company's culture.
If the culture is screwed up, I politely decline a contract extension when the time comes. My job is to design and code, not fixed f*cked up management. I had one 3-month contract where I had 4 different managers in that timeframe, due to political power plays and all kinds of crap, there's no way to as a contractor to correct that kind of situation in that timeframe.
When I was wet behind the ears, I used to try, but it was an exercise in futility, so now I don't bother. I certainly will ask for what I need, but if I can't get it - I just document my requests, cover my a*s, and move on when the time comes.
Being a junior developer is irrelevant your problem - if you have a good PM, hs/she should be willing to go to bat for your team, and demand functional and technical specs as needed. If not the project will be in jeopardy. If the PM does ask for requirements and doesn't get them, at least it's a CYA situation - and they can say look "get me the info the team needs, or I can't promise what will be delivered"
When you have a PM who isn't willing to do that you're bound to get screwed. Best thing to do is document all your requests for information, and tell the PM, if you want this to project to succeed, like it or not - I need information "x" and "y". If the project is a crash and burn, you can say you did what you were able to provided the information that was given to you - and you weren't given all you requested.
Any company-organization that considers you and 'idiot' for wanting clarification is looking to burn money on a failed project and/or happy to waste resources on lots of bugs fixes and patching. They should look in the mirror before viewing others as idiots.
Not surprsing that a CEO would make this remark. I can't count the times I've asked the business community I'm working with for clarification of a business rule or requirement, and then get a 'sigh' or other look that says - "I'm too busy to worry about this".
And on the contract I'm working on now, they consider a 30 min phone meeting enough information to build a full blown app - trying to get documentation is like pulling teeth. And of course we know where the finger will be pointed if there's any issues.
To say we're nerds who don't "get it" is just an asinine, condescending remark; a) I'm perfectable able to learn about the business involved, b) If you explain the rules properly most developers I know have no problem at all coding the solution. I find most of the developers I work with brighter than the business community they're working with. The CEOs remark has a dilbert-like quality to it imo, and this guy's one of the 'experts' on the problem in the article... ha!
I wasn't specifically connecting catholicism to biblical literalism, simply making the point that unlike science, religion and religious institutions do have political agendas... look at the what happened between Galileo and the Vatican for example when science pointed out flaws in biblical 'truth' [sic]
Probably a mindless troll, but I'll bite. WTF !?!? Science is science, period. It's only 'liberal' in the narrow mindset of people who think the earth is 4000 years old, and the fossil record is a trick by god to test someone's faith. It's called liberal because some people get so defensive when it points out the errors in their misguided, fantastical, untestable notions they cling to -- since the universe is too complex or scary to them.
The great thing about science is it doesn't have a preconceived notion to hold onto - if a theory is sound it holds up, if not, it is replaced or adjusted with further testing and observation by the originator or other scientists. Science itself does not have an agenda like an institution such as the vatican does.
Now, trying to teach 'creationism' in schools as anything but pure fiction, THAT'S political.
I'm an avid hiker/backpacker, and have run into 'yuppie' types who have their PDAs, GPSs, cell phones etc., with them on their trips; and consider themselves 'experienced' hikers. Problem is they couldn't navigate their way out of a paper bag with a map and compass, let alone tell me what 'mean declination' means.
After college, I worked at an independent bookstore for a bit, including the map department -- once had a hunter looking a topo map, point at the contour lines, and say 'they sure have a lot of roads there'. And to think the man owned a gun...
I do think there's some place for this kind of thing, but it's no replacement for knowledge, esp when you break it or the batteries die or you find yourself needing to think quickly without assistance.
But I'm also something of a purist, I backpack to 'get away from it all' including the digital realm, I really don't want this kind of gadget interfering with my experience. And please people be considerate of others - don't yammer on loudly for 15 min on your damn cell phone when others are trying to enjoy a little peace and enjoy what nature is offering. Thanks.
The debate obviously in part, is what defines marriage, and who gets to define it? I'm not sure the answer is all that clear.
Yes, people are welcome to follow their faith, but when they impose their views on others (anti-gay legislation et al) then they stepped over the line. If someone's faith requires them to step on my or another's rights, then telling them to back off is not 'narrow-minded', it's protecting my own rights and civil liberties, and often that of persecuted minority groups.
That's YOUR opinion. So does that mean heteros who choose not to, or are not able to have children, are "less" married than a family with 10 kids?
That's an extremely narrow-minded view of marriage, hell, it's a load of sh*t. And if 2 straight people marry because of 'affections', so be it, it isn't any of your or my freakin business. I don't care why they marry.
The implication that 'strong families' only come from straight unions is also crap. Gay or Straight, some couples are healthy and strong, some aren't. I know gay couples who've been together for years, and straight people who are on their 3rd marriage - does that mean anything? No, you just can't judge all relationship with sweeping remarks. You make broad generalizations with nothing to back it up whatsoever.
"My automatic breaking system failed"
"My distance detention system was faulty"
"The Xtreme Cruise Control X-5000 messed up"
While you might be able to proove/disprove such claims, I can see the suits now. I also worry about people thinking it's ok to be LESS attentive (or worse, sober) because their car will protect them, and other drivers, from their own poor driving.
I'm very much a believer that you should be doing one thing while you in a car - driving; which means 2 hands on the wheel unless you're shifting, and watching the road and other cars - NOT having a business meeting on a cell phone, combing your hair, having dinner, watching a DVD, etc. etc. Cars a big, powerful, fast machines that require full operator attention, at all times, period. [Ok, unless parked, while you're in the backseat with your gf/bf]
I think too many gadgets of convienence will only make driving less safe as drivers become lazier and generally less attentive, if not less skilled.
Go look on imdb to check out the ridiculous amount of milking of SW & Raiders he's done http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000184/
I think as time has passed he's clearly gotten worse, not better, like many writers-directors. When's the last time he wrote or directed a good movie? Decades imo; maybe Empire Strikes Back in '80 or Raiders of the Lost Ark in '81? [the 3rd one was ok I guess, 2nd was lame, we'll see about the the 4th]
People are free to buy yet another version of these films, I won't be one of them, in my book - he's wasted any good will and positive feelings I ever had about the SW universe by being the biggest commercial sellout I can think of, and diluting the 'myth' to the point of comedy.
He won't be getting any of my coin, for this or the upcoming SW films - ever since Jar Jar I was done with them. Too bad he ruined such a good thing.
My bad, should be Japanese-American, Sulu.
Sure Kirk had his butt kicking episodes, but there was often references to (at the time) contemporary or historical issues. Perhaps because they didn't interest you, you've forgotten them, which is fine, I'm just saying the commentary was clearly there.
I think if you do it without going over the top, being too obvious, too black-n-white or simplistic, social commentary can be very interesting and effective. Personally, I'd get tired of a program that just did action all the time with no context or reference point, that's was FPS's are for :)
My 2 cents anyhoo
Montreal... beautiful city. Colder than Vancouver, but beautiful nonetheless :)
Reason I ask is I thinking of returning to Canada (in Denver currently), probably BC and didn't get the impression it was proportionately any worse than in the US.
My response to the parent poster is that kids need to be held accountable for their account BUT treated with some respect and a litte understanding for their mistakes. And also that people who say "tough shit" or "too bad" to the geeky, nerdy, outsider kids who are picked on, mocked, or harassed - need to chill out and give them a break.
You made an illogical leap. Do NOT imply that I in anyway condone or accept someone destroying your property or vehicular homicide. That's wrong, they should be prosecuted, and it's not even part of this discussion.
Absolutely concur, I wasn't being specific to any one of the kids - was making a general statement.
As far as lawsuits, that's a whole other issue which drives me nuts, suing McDonald's for making you fat, etc etc - just stupid.
You're right, some of these kids are "severely dysfuctional ", but guess what? They probably got that way for some very complex reasons (I'd be very curious to know about their home lives, experiences, parents) and applauding or relishing in their humilation isn't going to make those kids better people.
Which is why I clearly said in my post, yes, you have to let them learn their lessons, but help them become more intelligent mature adults but also showing some compassion to what can be a very sh*tty, confusing, difficult time in life.