The government employee who withdrew was prepared to go up on that dias to speak. He was no chicken shit. But he has a **responsiblity** to separate what he does as a private person from what he does as a government worker so what he says is properly reflective upon either himself or the organization he works for.
I've written letters to the editor that have been published. But I have not used my government title. That's the difference. If I used my tile, my supervisor has every right to call me in on the carpet because what I said could have been construed to be government policy, thinking, plans, etc.
If Alan Greenspan was going to talk to a college economics class about economics, there would be no way that he could separate himself as a private person from his public role. However, if he was going to speak on woodworking that would be okay as long as his title wasn't used in any of the announcements.
Did your friend make the attempt? Did it work? Was he fired? Did he get a lawyer? Did he expose the incompetence to the press? Was his idea good short term thinking? Would have it saved money, etc in time? Did he "chicken" out?
I find the continued bashing of me and my coworkers to be unwarranted. We are good hard working people who are trying to get a good job done on dwindling budgets.
There is an apparent lack of a sense of responsibilty when you hear of Authur Anderson employees shredding important documents that would normally have been kept. There is also the **billions** that were wasted by Enron in some hair brain financial scheme.
Doing the right thing is what is important.
"you do understand that a rep for the FAA can make statements that civilian aircraft can be SHOT DOWN ON SUSPICION by navy gunners and not lose his job,"
If he is authorized to say so, there should be no problem.
"and yet you are suggesting that a mere identification of a government employee publically will cause the person to be held so accountable that they flee the event in fear and abandon all their plans"
If the speaker is a principled person of high standards, he would with draw his name. I would. In Europe, a minister caught in a scandal resigns. Here they send Ken Starr.;-)
We started using Linux full time in one of our major programs because of its reliability. We have had publically stated meetings where we have had Linux prominently printed in the Agenda. Microsoft did not send any reps, MS did not call someone higher up and complain. I have not heard of or been subject to any such coersion. If our major program becomes firmly entrenched on Linux, so go our partners in state, local, and some foreign governments. MS is nowhere to be found pressuring us. If they did, you would heard about it!! We would put our foot down and MS would have to back pedal.
P.S. I'm stating this as a private person and the opinions are that of a private person.
The author writes: "I have been talking with . Long story short, other speaker called this morning and said he can't do the talk. I got the impression he was in deep doo doo with his bosses. He asked me to take him off the Web site quickly, along with any reference in the description to . He said the talk can in no way appear to represent agency."
As a person who is a government employee, I can tell you that it is drilled into us that we can **not** use our governmental title or agency name in anything we do publically **unless** we are offically sanctioned to "act as an agent" of that governmental body. I suspect the governmental employee above was going to speak as "a private person" (without use of his title and agency name). However, his title and agency name appeared on the agenda and he was obligated to withdraw to avoid the **appearance** of representing his governmental agency in some sort of official capacity. There is nothing sinister about it as the article seemed to imply. It happens all the time.
For your discourse, you seem to be "young". About a decade ago, some of the software companies were worried about copying. They offered (including MS) copies of their software for about $15. Given inflation, $20 is NOT an unreasonable amount of money .
In order to verify that you are a legitimate owner of a broken CD, you'll probably have to send them the orginal CD or Title insert, etc. They will have to verify it, enter your name into their accounting system, send an order down to a warehouse, have some kid pull it from a rack, stick it in a mailer, cut an address label, apply the label, weigh it for postage, and stick it in a bag for mailing. With the overhead, cost of labor, etc. $20 does not seem that unreasonable.
Maybe your favorite store could do it more efficiently? Bring in your CD and get a replacement/copy for $5?
"Whaaaaa ? My website is secure, TYVM, it hasn't been defaced even once. Nobody ever stole my credit card number, and my personal info is well guarded. I have never have a single virus on my many computers. And none of my intellectual property was ever stolen."
I noticed you didn't post your URL. Bragging rights only go to those who **show** their untied Gordian Knots!!
--Alexander the Great
Big Business IS taking over the web. MS, AOL are two of my examples. They have the power to channel you to their preferred sites either through their content hotlinks or by eliminating from their search engine listings of viable choices that should have been readily found.
Try it yourself. Go to their sponsored "price grabber/finder" and type in a software title. See if they REALLY find you the lowest price from a company that's been around for several years. My favorite check is Provantage for consistently low prices. Does that company name appear in any of their results? If not you can be assured that the findees are paying some sort of fee to be found. But that's business.
If the major players can direct these people to their content sponsored sites, what's to prevent them from directing them to their sponsored information or thought sites? Yes there are ways around it IF you are webbily nimble.
Slashdot Mirror
We all won when the government bailed out Chrysler except if you bought a Plymouth Horizon.
The government employee who withdrew was prepared to go up on that dias to speak. He was no chicken shit. But he has a **responsiblity** to separate what he does as a private person from what he does as a government worker so what he says is properly reflective upon either himself or the organization he works for. I've written letters to the editor that have been published. But I have not used my government title. That's the difference. If I used my tile, my supervisor has every right to call me in on the carpet because what I said could have been construed to be government policy, thinking, plans, etc. If Alan Greenspan was going to talk to a college economics class about economics, there would be no way that he could separate himself as a private person from his public role. However, if he was going to speak on woodworking that would be okay as long as his title wasn't used in any of the announcements. Did your friend make the attempt? Did it work? Was he fired? Did he get a lawyer? Did he expose the incompetence to the press? Was his idea good short term thinking? Would have it saved money, etc in time? Did he "chicken" out? I find the continued bashing of me and my coworkers to be unwarranted. We are good hard working people who are trying to get a good job done on dwindling budgets. There is an apparent lack of a sense of responsibilty when you hear of Authur Anderson employees shredding important documents that would normally have been kept. There is also the **billions** that were wasted by Enron in some hair brain financial scheme. Doing the right thing is what is important.
"you do understand that a rep for the FAA can make statements that civilian aircraft can be SHOT DOWN ON SUSPICION by navy gunners and not lose his job," If he is authorized to say so, there should be no problem. "and yet you are suggesting that a mere identification of a government employee publically will cause the person to be held so accountable that they flee the event in fear and abandon all their plans" If the speaker is a principled person of high standards, he would with draw his name. I would. In Europe, a minister caught in a scandal resigns. Here they send Ken Starr. ;-)
We started using Linux full time in one of our major programs because of its reliability. We have had publically stated meetings where we have had Linux prominently printed in the Agenda. Microsoft did not send any reps, MS did not call someone higher up and complain. I have not heard of or been subject to any such coersion. If our major program becomes firmly entrenched on Linux, so go our partners in state, local, and some foreign governments. MS is nowhere to be found pressuring us. If they did, you would heard about it!! We would put our foot down and MS would have to back pedal.
P.S. I'm stating this as a private person and the opinions are that of a private person.
The author writes: "I have been talking with . Long story short, other speaker called this morning and said he can't do the talk. I got the impression he was in deep doo doo with his bosses. He asked me to take him off the Web site quickly, along with any reference in the description to . He said the talk can in no way appear to represent agency." As a person who is a government employee, I can tell you that it is drilled into us that we can **not** use our governmental title or agency name in anything we do publically **unless** we are offically sanctioned to "act as an agent" of that governmental body. I suspect the governmental employee above was going to speak as "a private person" (without use of his title and agency name). However, his title and agency name appeared on the agenda and he was obligated to withdraw to avoid the **appearance** of representing his governmental agency in some sort of official capacity. There is nothing sinister about it as the article seemed to imply. It happens all the time.
For your discourse, you seem to be "young". About a decade ago, some of the software companies were worried about copying. They offered (including MS) copies of their software for about $15. Given inflation, $20 is NOT an unreasonable amount of money . In order to verify that you are a legitimate owner of a broken CD, you'll probably have to send them the orginal CD or Title insert, etc. They will have to verify it, enter your name into their accounting system, send an order down to a warehouse, have some kid pull it from a rack, stick it in a mailer, cut an address label, apply the label, weigh it for postage, and stick it in a bag for mailing. With the overhead, cost of labor, etc. $20 does not seem that unreasonable. Maybe your favorite store could do it more efficiently? Bring in your CD and get a replacement/copy for $5?
"Whaaaaa ? My website is secure, TYVM, it hasn't been defaced even once. Nobody ever stole my credit card number, and my personal info is well guarded. I have never have a single virus on my many computers. And none of my intellectual property was ever stolen." I noticed you didn't post your URL. Bragging rights only go to those who **show** their untied Gordian Knots!! --Alexander the Great
Big Business IS taking over the web. MS, AOL are two of my examples. They have the power to channel you to their preferred sites either through their content hotlinks or by eliminating from their search engine listings of viable choices that should have been readily found.
Try it yourself. Go to their sponsored "price grabber/finder" and type in a software title. See if they REALLY find you the lowest price from a company that's been around for several years. My favorite check is Provantage for consistently low prices. Does that company name appear in any of their results? If not you can be assured that the findees are paying some sort of fee to be found. But that's business.
If the major players can direct these people to their content sponsored sites, what's to prevent them from directing them to their sponsored information or thought sites? Yes there are ways around it IF you are webbily nimble.