I'm trying to figure out what is wrong with the next generation? Is this a right of passage when you hit the age of 50? It seems that my parents must've had this same question. What is wrong with our kids?
The reason I'm having this question, is that my wife and I work very hard and sacrifice in order to have what we have. We believe we have provided a good example for our son, but it wouldn't appear so by his behavior. He seems lazy with no interest in working to better himself or to provide for a family in the future. He has none of the values and virtues that my wife and I have tried to provide by example. What have we done wrong?
Our son has told us, more than once, that he does not intend to work as hard as we do. I could buy this if he were born and raised as a rich kid. He was not. So how does he think he's going to get by in the world, if not by his own labor? Does he think the grand universe out there is just going to bring him frankincense and myrrh?
And it's not just our son. We have seen many kids his age saying the same things about their parents. They are not interested in working and sacrificing the way that their parents did. They like the comforts and privilege that those labors provide, but they don't seem to be motivated to actually do the work, and they have no concept of sacrifice. How did so many parents go wrong? How did we go wrong?
I look at how our country got where it is today. Despite a low approval around the world, there are still more people trying very hard to move here from other places in the world, so we must be doing something right here. We must still be a good place to live. So how did this country get this way? It seems to me that the answer is the hard work and sacrifice of those that went before us.
I know that our forefathers weren't perfect, and that not all were truly virtuous, but still, the general concept of being an American, working hard and providing a better life for yourself and your family, is still the American Dream. It is still an admirable goal, and the goal is still within reach of those willing to put out the effort and sacrifice, even for those of the lower incomes of our society. If you want it bad enough, you can have it.
My wife and I do work hard. We haven't treated ourselves to a vacation or anything like that in several years. It's time overdue, but we've been working towards the goal of getting our dream home built. If we were rich, we'd just hire it done and pay for it all. If we were the type to want immediate gratification and unwilling to work hard and sacrifice and be patient, we'd just get a loan for house we couldn't afford (like many people, and figure we'd get bailed out when our day of reconning came). We didn't do that. We chose to build as much as possible on our own, and pay as we go. We're not rich and so our house is not quite even halfway built. It's probably a 3-year project. When it's done, my wife and I will take a vacation.
We are focused.
Our son isn't interested in working. He wants the vacations. He wants the comforts. He wants the luxuries, but isn't willing to put out the effort for even a small portion of his standard of living. You'd honestly believe that he must've been the son of a multi-millionaire, because he seems to have no concept of work and sacrifice.
So what did we do wrong? I'm not comletely sure because I've seen other people who work hard and their kids are much worse than our's. Compared to them, our son is a real do-it-yourselfer.
As I right this, the small dog yard that we have, which is smaller than the standard yard at a home in the city, is a foot high in grass and weeds. One of the few chores we have for our son, he has repeatedly put off and not done. He seems to feel that his primary daily chore is to feed himself. He wont even get up until 1 or 2 in the afternoon, and we keep wondering how you can seriously be looking for a job when you refuse to change this schedule.
My wife and I have decided to give him the boot at the end of the month, with no choice. Maybe if life is uncomfortable enough, he'll finally get his nose to the grindstone, at least enough to pay rent and pay for groceries. The car he's driving is one that we're going to have to give him, because he never would budget and save for one, and to move away from us and get to work, he'll need some kind of transportation. So we'll sign it over to him, because we can't trust that he'll actually insure it. If left in our names, we'd be sued if he had an accident. So he's being rewarded for being lazy, but at the same time, kicking him out is a significant financial savings for us each month. I'm sorry it came to this. Why couldn't he have worked? Why couldn't he have done even one thing that would've shown an attempt at changing his ways? Why wouldn't he work to at least pay car insurance?
It's not like he's 14 years old and we're asking too much. He's 29 years old. Why is 29 too young to be expected to be an adult? How old do you have to be before growing up? I don't get it.
One thing is clear to me. If the next generation is this spoiled and unmotivated, the nation is in trouble. The pioneer spirit of our forefathers, that got us this far, isn't in the next generation. The American pop culture has been "pussified" (if that's not a word, it is now).
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Friday, July 25, 2008
Adventures in Micro-Blogging
I thought I'd jot a few lines down regarding something that I've been experimenting with. The term is micro-blogging. Blogging itself is fairly new to a lot of people, but micro-blogging is even more foreign to a lot of people. Micro-blogging is like blogging, except that it's very brief status messages or thoughts that you can contain within a 140 character message. Micro-blogging sites are popping up everywhere and have become very popular. Twitter.com and identi.ca are two of the biggies.
I never thought I'd get into blogging, much less micro-blogging. When I first saw what micro-blogging was, I thought "what a waste of time". But then I experimented and found some value. From a community perspective, it feels good to be able to keep up with what friends (or acquaintances) are doing on a moment to moment basis. Twitter and identi.ca, as well as most of the other micro-blog sites, provide almost instantaneous updates. So you make an update, and then whenever someone "following" you (or subscribed to your 'feed') updates their browser window, they see your most recent update.
Since there are so many micro-blogging sites, I think it's a bit early to tell which one is going to take off. Which one will end up being the "VHS" of the industry. To hedge my bets, I looked around and found an assortment of tools for updating multiple micro-blogging sites. Currently, I'm working with ping.fm as well as hellotxt.com. I'm not sure which one I really like, but I do like the features that both are trying to provide.
What these sites do is allow you to post one time, and they take your message, and post to all of your micro-blogging sites. So from one point, I can type my quick little message, click on the "Send" button and the message gets sent out to Twitter, identi.ca, hi5.com, Facebook, Myspace, pownce, linkedin, plaxo, plurk, brightkite, beemood, and a few other sites.
About the only trouble is that from time to time, these micro-blog sites might be down or "constipated" for a few seconds, and so the message might not actually get posted to Twitter or one of your other sites, but typically will be posted to most. What I like about hellotxt currently, is that it tells you if it failed on any, which gives you the opportunity to repost only to that one if you wish. Overall, I like ping.fm better, but I like that one feature of hellotxt enough to continue using it.
I haven't found a site that monitors all of the micro-blog sites for me yet, but hellotxt makes an attempt to monitor a few. I currently tend to just monitor twitter for now, because that's the site that most of my friends are on, but identi.ca is growing in popularity and a few of my friends are moving over to it.
And of course, there's still the myspace and facebook folks, so my updates (140 characters or less) go there as well.
Will I do this micro-blogging long-term? I don't know, but for now, I think it's kinda cool to be able to keep up with what some of my friends are doing during the day. Some of these folks I haven't seen in years, but I can still keep up with their day to day activities.
I never thought I'd get into blogging, much less micro-blogging. When I first saw what micro-blogging was, I thought "what a waste of time". But then I experimented and found some value. From a community perspective, it feels good to be able to keep up with what friends (or acquaintances) are doing on a moment to moment basis. Twitter and identi.ca, as well as most of the other micro-blog sites, provide almost instantaneous updates. So you make an update, and then whenever someone "following" you (or subscribed to your 'feed') updates their browser window, they see your most recent update.
Since there are so many micro-blogging sites, I think it's a bit early to tell which one is going to take off. Which one will end up being the "VHS" of the industry. To hedge my bets, I looked around and found an assortment of tools for updating multiple micro-blogging sites. Currently, I'm working with ping.fm as well as hellotxt.com. I'm not sure which one I really like, but I do like the features that both are trying to provide.
What these sites do is allow you to post one time, and they take your message, and post to all of your micro-blogging sites. So from one point, I can type my quick little message, click on the "Send" button and the message gets sent out to Twitter, identi.ca, hi5.com, Facebook, Myspace, pownce, linkedin, plaxo, plurk, brightkite, beemood, and a few other sites.
About the only trouble is that from time to time, these micro-blog sites might be down or "constipated" for a few seconds, and so the message might not actually get posted to Twitter or one of your other sites, but typically will be posted to most. What I like about hellotxt currently, is that it tells you if it failed on any, which gives you the opportunity to repost only to that one if you wish. Overall, I like ping.fm better, but I like that one feature of hellotxt enough to continue using it.
I haven't found a site that monitors all of the micro-blog sites for me yet, but hellotxt makes an attempt to monitor a few. I currently tend to just monitor twitter for now, because that's the site that most of my friends are on, but identi.ca is growing in popularity and a few of my friends are moving over to it.
And of course, there's still the myspace and facebook folks, so my updates (140 characters or less) go there as well.
Will I do this micro-blogging long-term? I don't know, but for now, I think it's kinda cool to be able to keep up with what some of my friends are doing during the day. Some of these folks I haven't seen in years, but I can still keep up with their day to day activities.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
When good jobs go bad
I've often wondered how to account for a bad job on a resume. You have to show that you worked there and had that experience, but feel awkward about showing that for concern that interviews (and screeners) at job prospects will wonder why you spent only a short time at a particular employer.
Companies have bad employees from time to time and that's okay, but how does an employee reflect that he had a bad employer? I've never been able to figure that one out.
I once had a great employer, I thought, who hired me and gave me a chance to get back into useful programming, as opposed to the niche that I'd gotten myself into for a number of years, of which there was no market for. This employer let me work there, although I was getting paid entry-level pay, for the same work that others in the company were getting almost 50% more for. Still, I was grateful. When I got enough experience to apply for a better job, I took it. My employer initially accepted this, but later he was resentful of me and sent me hateful e-mails, saying that I had "recruited" from his staff. I didn't know it at the time, but he'd had some turnover after I left. It was a small shop. Who was I going to recruit? He was one of the programmers. We had another programmer in California. I wasn't going to be able to recruit him. And then there was another programmer that had already indicated that he was leaving, before I announced that I was leaving. So who did I recruit? I never found this out, but I felt awkward having this company on my resume for fear of what this guy might say about me. A crafty screener would only have to ask "would you hire this guy again" to be given an answer of "no" and that would be the end of my job chances. So I couldn't put this company on my resume, although I'd done a good job there and they were a good employer for all I knew the whole time that I was there.
Recently, I worked at an agency for the State of Oklahoma. I didn't realize it when I took the job, but it was going to be "the job from hell". How could I reflect that on a resume, and account that it was a bad employer, not that I was a bad employee?
When I took that job, I just knew the people I was working with seemed to be nice people. My interviewers were wonderful, I thought. Both were a couple of nice ladies who I felt I would get along with well, and I felt it wouldn't hurt to be working for a state agency at a time when the job market seemed in flux. Working with a company that had a set budget seemed like a good idea, and the benefits were reasonably good.
Well, the first thing I found out was that the project I was working on was somewhat covert. It was a project to replace another system that never worked right. The other system costed approximately $8 million and never quite did what it should've done. However, upon further investigation, I found that a majority of the reason it didn't do what it should was that they didn't have good data; because the system didn't validate data when it was entered, and people doing data entry just entered data the fastest way they could with no regard for accuracy or the ability for usability.
And it appeared that the reason they didn't have validation was because someone in management requested that it be removed.
So another effort was going on to replace this system. This created a political conflict within the agency because we were an effort off from the IT group, and so the IT group hated us and would provide us little or no support. On top of that, the original group that had started this replacement system had all left. None of them were really programmers. They were network engineers that had done a good job prototyping the initial system, but didn't really know how to develop a full-blown system, and the people put in charge of running the project, because it wasn't a part of IT, didn't really have a clue of how to run an IT project. They didn't know how software development was done. The people put in charge of this project (paid for with state tax payer dollars) were good at being parole officers and dealing with offenders, they never quite understood why things work the way they work in a software development lifecycle. We couldn't get real nailed down requirements, and the initial replacement system was so poorly documented and designed (for lack of direction) that it got scrapped (unbeknownst to the bosses in OKC) and a replacement replacement system (to be a replacement for the $8 million system) was embarked upon.
In good faith, we were doing well, but under pressure to deliver a finished system. The replacement system had been a three year effort when I started the company. Within a couple of months, we were under a strict deadline to have the full system delivered within another couple of months, as if our replacement for the replacement system had been going on for 3 years. It had been going on for maybe 3 weeks. So I should've known then that it was time to look for another job, but I didnt' want to be seen as a "job hopper" and just felt that I needed to put in some extra hours, not get stressed out, and just get the job done. I'd worked under adverse conditions in the past (over a 30 year period), and so I didn't see this as anything more than a challenge. It could be fun, I thought.
Well, the demands became ridiculous. We were given little direction for what needed to be done. We were developing a system that we knew very little about what the process was, and the people to ask were rarely there. When they were they, they didn't want to go over requirements. It was something they wanted to avoid. We did the best we could, with what little we had. There were 3 programmers and a project manager. She, the project manager, was a fish out of water. She meant well, but had no experience at running an enterprise software development effort. All of her previous experience had been in game development, which she seemed well suited at, but she didn't know a thing about how databases work, or how to get functional requirements from SMEs (subject matter experts), or how to understand the problems developers would have in meeting a schedule and turning those requirements into functional logic that would produce the finished system. She knew games.
One of our programmers had a "melt down" and went on a cursing tyraid about "working for idiots". I found out later that this wasn't his first time. This time, he was asked to resign. He later said that this was the best thing that ever happened to him. He went elsewhere making much more money, and seemed happier. And he didn't seem to go on any more tyrauds either.
Next, I felt pressure. I knew nothing about SQL Server Reporting Services at the time, and told them that in my job interview, but I suddenly had to become an expert overnight. There was a big pressure to have about 30 working reports for management, even though we didn't even have a system that had data tables yet, that these reports would run from? How can you create reports when you don't have data? I never could get our leader to understand this. I got frustrated. The reports were never acceptable to her. She wouldn't tell me how to gather the data that she wanted. I did what I thought would work, but I wasn't the SME, she was, but she was never around to get the answers, and the PM was no help.
I did the best job I could do. I struggled and got the reports, and then the day before the deadline, she finally got around to reviewing the reports and decided that they weren't working right. So she threw a fit. I felt enormous stress. It wasn't good for my health. Upon repeated interruptions while I was still trying to fix what she didn't like, I finally had to tell the PM that I could only work on one thing at a time, and that these logic changes were complicated and that if I were stressed anymore, I might just decide that none of it were worth it and just leave. I'd had it.
Well, I expressed this twice in a two week period, and so the big boss let me know that she wasn't pleased with me. Well, after getting it all to work and more time went by, I finally decided to give my notice. I was too stressed out. I wanted to work on building my house full time (see http://www.freewebs.com/stocktonunderground) and that my wife agreed that it would be worth it for me to be under less stress and just get work done on the house. My wife saw me not sleeping at night. I was so stressed out that it was affecting my health; and nothing I did at work was ever good enough.
I kept thinking that maybe it was my fault and that I could've handled it better, but I was so glad to be over that job. Well, 4 months later, I just had lunch with the remaining programmer. Actually, he is no longer remaining. He turned in his resignation last Friday. He was frustrated with things, just as the guy that went on the tyraid. He just didnt' cuss them out like that guy did.
It seems that from the time I left 4 months ago, the boss was gone for 2 of those months, and then she returned for a few days and then went on a vacation for a week or so. After that, she was gone to meetings in OKC or anywhere but the office. The PM had committed to an additional system, and a deadline of two weeks, without even checking with Steve (the programmer) first. It was around the 19th of the month, and the system was due at the end of the month. During that period, they spent a week in OKC in training, but it was training for what the PM wanted, not what Steve had requested. The deadline didn't get pushed back either.
There were approximately 8 screens of which 6 were done by Steve, and 2 were done by the PM and a junior programmer they'd hired. At the final week, Steve put in over 80 hours to get that system in. His 6 screens worked. the other 2 didn't. That was beyond his control. The PM decided that she wanted to "pretty up" the screens, and so she did that the night before the deadline. What she did was treat them as a WYSIWYG concept, with no regards for these being software systems. At the end, she found out they didn't work, and so Steve was called in at 7:30 (he'd been at the office til 3:30 that morning) and told "get your butt up here because we've got a problem". Well, the data-sources had been removed. That's why it didn't work. The PM had done it again, as she'd done multiple times in the past (even when I was still there), and she still didn't get it.
Steve fixed the problem, but the boss was still furious because those final 2 screens didn't work. Steve had done 6 of the 8, and it was his fault that the system didn't work. Steve was publicly humiliated and derated in the office. He was the only guy there. He later told me that he'll never work for a woman again. I think that's a bit strong. I'm not against working for a woman again, but I am against working for someone that doesn't know how software is developed. I'll never do that again.
Steve has taken a job already. He starts August 4th at a company where I knew a few of the people working there. It's a good employer and he'll be making more money.
Steve and I (as well as Joe who left before us) have a problem of how to report this employer on a resume. You want to account for your time, but how do you report a bad employer? Employers report bad employees, and I'm sure none of the 3 of us will be seen as "rehireable" at that company. So we're the bad employees the way they're going to tell it. How does an employee, that does everything right that he can, state that he had a bad employer, without appearing to have "sour grapes" and/or being unprofessional? Looking back, it seems like there's a trend. None of the original programmers were there. Joe left. I left. Steve left. At some point, it can't all be the programmers' fault. There has to be a common denominator that indicates the source of the real problem.
Anyway, I'm struggling with this. I still like the lady that I worked for there. Maybe she was just dealing with stress from her boss, who was quite demanding. There were stories in the office about how extreme that lady in OKC could be, and to tell you quite honestly, that woman would never have been allowed to get away with some of the things she got away with in a state agency. If it were the private sector, she'd have been fired decades earlier. I like my boss though and it troubled me to see how things went when Steve left. I wanted it to work out for all of them; for them to deliver the system, meeting expectations and all have continued careers working for the state.
How do Steve, Joe or I, list this employer on our resume, and document how things were, so that if screeners do contact that agency and find that we're listed as "no rehire" that there's a logical explanation to back up our view that we were not bad employees?
Companies have bad employees from time to time and that's okay, but how does an employee reflect that he had a bad employer? I've never been able to figure that one out.
I once had a great employer, I thought, who hired me and gave me a chance to get back into useful programming, as opposed to the niche that I'd gotten myself into for a number of years, of which there was no market for. This employer let me work there, although I was getting paid entry-level pay, for the same work that others in the company were getting almost 50% more for. Still, I was grateful. When I got enough experience to apply for a better job, I took it. My employer initially accepted this, but later he was resentful of me and sent me hateful e-mails, saying that I had "recruited" from his staff. I didn't know it at the time, but he'd had some turnover after I left. It was a small shop. Who was I going to recruit? He was one of the programmers. We had another programmer in California. I wasn't going to be able to recruit him. And then there was another programmer that had already indicated that he was leaving, before I announced that I was leaving. So who did I recruit? I never found this out, but I felt awkward having this company on my resume for fear of what this guy might say about me. A crafty screener would only have to ask "would you hire this guy again" to be given an answer of "no" and that would be the end of my job chances. So I couldn't put this company on my resume, although I'd done a good job there and they were a good employer for all I knew the whole time that I was there.
Recently, I worked at an agency for the State of Oklahoma. I didn't realize it when I took the job, but it was going to be "the job from hell". How could I reflect that on a resume, and account that it was a bad employer, not that I was a bad employee?
When I took that job, I just knew the people I was working with seemed to be nice people. My interviewers were wonderful, I thought. Both were a couple of nice ladies who I felt I would get along with well, and I felt it wouldn't hurt to be working for a state agency at a time when the job market seemed in flux. Working with a company that had a set budget seemed like a good idea, and the benefits were reasonably good.
Well, the first thing I found out was that the project I was working on was somewhat covert. It was a project to replace another system that never worked right. The other system costed approximately $8 million and never quite did what it should've done. However, upon further investigation, I found that a majority of the reason it didn't do what it should was that they didn't have good data; because the system didn't validate data when it was entered, and people doing data entry just entered data the fastest way they could with no regard for accuracy or the ability for usability.
And it appeared that the reason they didn't have validation was because someone in management requested that it be removed.
So another effort was going on to replace this system. This created a political conflict within the agency because we were an effort off from the IT group, and so the IT group hated us and would provide us little or no support. On top of that, the original group that had started this replacement system had all left. None of them were really programmers. They were network engineers that had done a good job prototyping the initial system, but didn't really know how to develop a full-blown system, and the people put in charge of running the project, because it wasn't a part of IT, didn't really have a clue of how to run an IT project. They didn't know how software development was done. The people put in charge of this project (paid for with state tax payer dollars) were good at being parole officers and dealing with offenders, they never quite understood why things work the way they work in a software development lifecycle. We couldn't get real nailed down requirements, and the initial replacement system was so poorly documented and designed (for lack of direction) that it got scrapped (unbeknownst to the bosses in OKC) and a replacement replacement system (to be a replacement for the $8 million system) was embarked upon.
In good faith, we were doing well, but under pressure to deliver a finished system. The replacement system had been a three year effort when I started the company. Within a couple of months, we were under a strict deadline to have the full system delivered within another couple of months, as if our replacement for the replacement system had been going on for 3 years. It had been going on for maybe 3 weeks. So I should've known then that it was time to look for another job, but I didnt' want to be seen as a "job hopper" and just felt that I needed to put in some extra hours, not get stressed out, and just get the job done. I'd worked under adverse conditions in the past (over a 30 year period), and so I didn't see this as anything more than a challenge. It could be fun, I thought.
Well, the demands became ridiculous. We were given little direction for what needed to be done. We were developing a system that we knew very little about what the process was, and the people to ask were rarely there. When they were they, they didn't want to go over requirements. It was something they wanted to avoid. We did the best we could, with what little we had. There were 3 programmers and a project manager. She, the project manager, was a fish out of water. She meant well, but had no experience at running an enterprise software development effort. All of her previous experience had been in game development, which she seemed well suited at, but she didn't know a thing about how databases work, or how to get functional requirements from SMEs (subject matter experts), or how to understand the problems developers would have in meeting a schedule and turning those requirements into functional logic that would produce the finished system. She knew games.
One of our programmers had a "melt down" and went on a cursing tyraid about "working for idiots". I found out later that this wasn't his first time. This time, he was asked to resign. He later said that this was the best thing that ever happened to him. He went elsewhere making much more money, and seemed happier. And he didn't seem to go on any more tyrauds either.
Next, I felt pressure. I knew nothing about SQL Server Reporting Services at the time, and told them that in my job interview, but I suddenly had to become an expert overnight. There was a big pressure to have about 30 working reports for management, even though we didn't even have a system that had data tables yet, that these reports would run from? How can you create reports when you don't have data? I never could get our leader to understand this. I got frustrated. The reports were never acceptable to her. She wouldn't tell me how to gather the data that she wanted. I did what I thought would work, but I wasn't the SME, she was, but she was never around to get the answers, and the PM was no help.
I did the best job I could do. I struggled and got the reports, and then the day before the deadline, she finally got around to reviewing the reports and decided that they weren't working right. So she threw a fit. I felt enormous stress. It wasn't good for my health. Upon repeated interruptions while I was still trying to fix what she didn't like, I finally had to tell the PM that I could only work on one thing at a time, and that these logic changes were complicated and that if I were stressed anymore, I might just decide that none of it were worth it and just leave. I'd had it.
Well, I expressed this twice in a two week period, and so the big boss let me know that she wasn't pleased with me. Well, after getting it all to work and more time went by, I finally decided to give my notice. I was too stressed out. I wanted to work on building my house full time (see http://www.freewebs.com/stocktonunderground) and that my wife agreed that it would be worth it for me to be under less stress and just get work done on the house. My wife saw me not sleeping at night. I was so stressed out that it was affecting my health; and nothing I did at work was ever good enough.
I kept thinking that maybe it was my fault and that I could've handled it better, but I was so glad to be over that job. Well, 4 months later, I just had lunch with the remaining programmer. Actually, he is no longer remaining. He turned in his resignation last Friday. He was frustrated with things, just as the guy that went on the tyraid. He just didnt' cuss them out like that guy did.
It seems that from the time I left 4 months ago, the boss was gone for 2 of those months, and then she returned for a few days and then went on a vacation for a week or so. After that, she was gone to meetings in OKC or anywhere but the office. The PM had committed to an additional system, and a deadline of two weeks, without even checking with Steve (the programmer) first. It was around the 19th of the month, and the system was due at the end of the month. During that period, they spent a week in OKC in training, but it was training for what the PM wanted, not what Steve had requested. The deadline didn't get pushed back either.
There were approximately 8 screens of which 6 were done by Steve, and 2 were done by the PM and a junior programmer they'd hired. At the final week, Steve put in over 80 hours to get that system in. His 6 screens worked. the other 2 didn't. That was beyond his control. The PM decided that she wanted to "pretty up" the screens, and so she did that the night before the deadline. What she did was treat them as a WYSIWYG concept, with no regards for these being software systems. At the end, she found out they didn't work, and so Steve was called in at 7:30 (he'd been at the office til 3:30 that morning) and told "get your butt up here because we've got a problem". Well, the data-sources had been removed. That's why it didn't work. The PM had done it again, as she'd done multiple times in the past (even when I was still there), and she still didn't get it.
Steve fixed the problem, but the boss was still furious because those final 2 screens didn't work. Steve had done 6 of the 8, and it was his fault that the system didn't work. Steve was publicly humiliated and derated in the office. He was the only guy there. He later told me that he'll never work for a woman again. I think that's a bit strong. I'm not against working for a woman again, but I am against working for someone that doesn't know how software is developed. I'll never do that again.
Steve has taken a job already. He starts August 4th at a company where I knew a few of the people working there. It's a good employer and he'll be making more money.
Steve and I (as well as Joe who left before us) have a problem of how to report this employer on a resume. You want to account for your time, but how do you report a bad employer? Employers report bad employees, and I'm sure none of the 3 of us will be seen as "rehireable" at that company. So we're the bad employees the way they're going to tell it. How does an employee, that does everything right that he can, state that he had a bad employer, without appearing to have "sour grapes" and/or being unprofessional? Looking back, it seems like there's a trend. None of the original programmers were there. Joe left. I left. Steve left. At some point, it can't all be the programmers' fault. There has to be a common denominator that indicates the source of the real problem.
Anyway, I'm struggling with this. I still like the lady that I worked for there. Maybe she was just dealing with stress from her boss, who was quite demanding. There were stories in the office about how extreme that lady in OKC could be, and to tell you quite honestly, that woman would never have been allowed to get away with some of the things she got away with in a state agency. If it were the private sector, she'd have been fired decades earlier. I like my boss though and it troubled me to see how things went when Steve left. I wanted it to work out for all of them; for them to deliver the system, meeting expectations and all have continued careers working for the state.
How do Steve, Joe or I, list this employer on our resume, and document how things were, so that if screeners do contact that agency and find that we're listed as "no rehire" that there's a logical explanation to back up our view that we were not bad employees?
Friday, July 18, 2008
I need a vacation ...
There was a time in my life when I didn't know what a vacation was. I'd never really had much of a vacation, because when I was a kid, I was from a poor working class family, and we just didn't do vacations.My dad worked in construction, and so when he wasn't working, he was unemployed. During that time was not the time to be spending money on stuff other than bills and rent. So there were no vacations, but I had heard about them from other kids.As an adult, I finally got to go on a vacation with some friends of mine and that hooked me. Prior to that, I put in 60 to 80 hour weeks on the job and rarely took time off (because had no vacations). Even lost PTO when it wouldn't roll over any longer.That one vacation ruined me though. From then on, I knew what I was missing and have sought out vacations from time to time ever since.Since the year 2000, I haven't taken a lot of vacations. There was a job change, and then several years of hard times, but then we became prosperous again, but then we were on a mission to build a house. So that has occupied my time.I don't really remember the last time I was on a real vacation. I've had a day or two off work from time to time, but that was usually do spend on personal business.We've had visits with the in-laws once a year, but I drive all that time and so it's not what I really think of as a vacation. Nonetheless, it's a break from the routine, and so it feels good to me. I miss it.I don't know when it will be, but I'm really, really, really, really wanting a vacation.and I mean it in a really bad way.I want to return to New Orleans. We haven't been since the year before Katrina. The French Quarter is fine and the cabins at Bayou Segnette State Park (across the river from the French Quarter) are just fine. So we want to return for 3 or 4 days, maybe visiting a plantation or two in the area, as we've done in the past.I'd like to go to the Black Hills and Mt. Rushmore some day, and my wife recommends Yellowstone. I haven't been to any of these.There's the amish country in Pennsylvania. My wife was raised Mennonite and so we have an interest in amish country, as well as I think it would just be a nice place to go photograph.I'm really longing for a vacation.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Testing, one, 2 tree
This is just a test from ping.fm, to see how it writes to wordpress. I've got it set up to feed serveral blogs and micro-blog social networking sites.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
The Big Bailouts are a rip-off to the common man
I am more and more frustrated with the bailouts. First, we (via the Federal Reserve, who made the dollars in my pocket and your's less valuable in order to) bail out the big failing banks. We shored them up because we were told that it would hurt the entire country if we didn't. That's bogus and we all know it.Next, the democrats used this as an opportunity to buy votes, bailing out people defaulting on their mortgages. However, those mortgages were mostly yuppies buying houses way beyond what they could reasonably afford. They gambled and lost, getting caught by the rising rates of the adjustable rate mortgages. They knew these were adjustable rates. What part of adjustable did they really not understand?So these bailouts and now the Indy Mac and Freddie Mac bailouts. When will it end?Here's the truth. The execs that ran these big banks and financial groups, were paid millions of dollars in bonuses for the decades, while they were making irresponsible risks. They gambled and failed and why should we bail them out?It seems that when they fail, they share the losses with the citizens, but when they profit, they don't share.And democrats or republicans, it doesn't matter who is in control of Congress, because they always make sure this keeps happening.It goes on locally too. Locally, we had a group of rich guys that started a company called Great Plains Airlines. It was a dumb and risky idea, but it was their money and they could do what they wanted. The thing is, they got the City of Tulsa to put up the guarantees through a large financial institution.Well, Great Plains folded. From the beginning, they never even attempted the markets that they were charted to go after, and so it was no surprise that they failed.So they lost money, but the city and the financial institution were left holding the bag. In order to pay the financial institution, naming rights to our new arena were awarded. These usually go for over $30 million, but it was a bargain basement price because of what was owed in the Great Plains deal.Now, only recently, the mayor of the city pulled a backdoor secret deal (it seems so) with a deadline of only 48 hours, and came up with emergency money to pay the bank their $8 million.Wait a minute! Didn't they get naming rights? That should've been payment. Now the citizens are left holding the bag. And the city really had no legal responsibilities, but they pulled a deal with no time for city councelors to contest it. It went through, and the citizens foot the $8 million bill.If Great Plains had profited, nothing would've been shared with the citizens, but the losses, oh, they'll share that with the citizens.Time and time we see this sort of thing go on. It happens at the top and it happens in the bottom levels of government. The reason it happens is that the citizens aren't paying attention, and the ones in control and the big money interests know it.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
No-Touch Icing
I know that no-touch icing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icing_(ice_hockey) was instituted in the NHL (and other leagues) as a measure to reduce injuries, but the unintended side effect, in my opinion, is that it rewards lazy skaters and teams.
Supposedly, no-touch icing was sold as a way to speed up games. But it doesn't, and the linesmen still have to skate the length of the rink to get the puck, plus there's the stoppage of play.
Injuries occur in a lot of games, and if the leagues were really concerned about injuries, they do something about head injuries. The no-touch icing is little threat to those, the most being leg or ankle injuries from racing into the boards.
I could probably stomach the no-touch icing if it were waived off if it was clear that the defenceman could've gotten the puck or even stopped it, but intentionally allowed it to go by so that icing would occur. In this instance, it seems to me that this is an intentional stoppage of play, similar in action (and certainly the result) of a goalie sending the puck over the glass. It stops the play, and to avoid this, a penalty is dealt to the goalie to stop this stoppage. Intentionally allowing the puck to get by, is just as wrong and certainly sucks the life out of a game, as a goalie knocking the puck over the glass to stop the play and interrupt a possible scoring opportunity.
I have seen the reaction by a number of fans, and we all agree that even though the intentions of the rule were noble, that the practice of no-touch icing has sucked the life and excitement out of hockey games, and it rewards lazy defencemen and lazy teams in general.
In my opinion, if the puck is fired to the opposite end of the ice, and the offensive skater is fast enough to get by the defenceman and beat him to the puck, then he deserves the scoring opportunity.
Supposedly, no-touch icing was sold as a way to speed up games. But it doesn't, and the linesmen still have to skate the length of the rink to get the puck, plus there's the stoppage of play.
Injuries occur in a lot of games, and if the leagues were really concerned about injuries, they do something about head injuries. The no-touch icing is little threat to those, the most being leg or ankle injuries from racing into the boards.
I could probably stomach the no-touch icing if it were waived off if it was clear that the defenceman could've gotten the puck or even stopped it, but intentionally allowed it to go by so that icing would occur. In this instance, it seems to me that this is an intentional stoppage of play, similar in action (and certainly the result) of a goalie sending the puck over the glass. It stops the play, and to avoid this, a penalty is dealt to the goalie to stop this stoppage. Intentionally allowing the puck to get by, is just as wrong and certainly sucks the life out of a game, as a goalie knocking the puck over the glass to stop the play and interrupt a possible scoring opportunity.
I have seen the reaction by a number of fans, and we all agree that even though the intentions of the rule were noble, that the practice of no-touch icing has sucked the life and excitement out of hockey games, and it rewards lazy defencemen and lazy teams in general.
In my opinion, if the puck is fired to the opposite end of the ice, and the offensive skater is fast enough to get by the defenceman and beat him to the puck, then he deserves the scoring opportunity.
People Who Wrongly Park In Handicapped Parking
It happens more and more frequently that I see people that walk just as good, if not better than I do, who park in parking spots designated for the handicapped. These have got to be some of the most selfish people on the face of the earth. When their car is parked there, someone that needs that parking slot has to park in a less convenient spot. It's not right.
It also seems that some selfish people out there believe that even though they themselves are not in a wheelchair or need a cane, that if they have a family member in a wheelchair, that this gives them an excuse to use handicapped parking, again either missing, or not caring that someone else is possibly suffering because of their inconsiderate behavior. It's not the wheelchair sticker hanging from the rear view mirror that makes it okay. If you don't need a wheelchair or cane, then the spirit of the rule is being violated.
I used to not see this very often, but I'm seeing it almost every day now.
It also seems that some selfish people out there believe that even though they themselves are not in a wheelchair or need a cane, that if they have a family member in a wheelchair, that this gives them an excuse to use handicapped parking, again either missing, or not caring that someone else is possibly suffering because of their inconsiderate behavior. It's not the wheelchair sticker hanging from the rear view mirror that makes it okay. If you don't need a wheelchair or cane, then the spirit of the rule is being violated.
I used to not see this very often, but I'm seeing it almost every day now.
Tired of political hatred
I am as strong with political and social opinions as anyone. I'm so tired of the hatred for one belief over the other and the demonization that a lot of people have for anyone that disagrees with their own view.I heard my pastor talk about this one time, avoiding the politics, and just saying that the hatred seems to originate from the concept of 'pride', which we, as Christians, see as sinful.He went on to say that because of pride, we value our opinions over those of others, and we are so prideful that "we are right" and that makes us better people than the next guy "who is wrong".In simplicity, he says that we have become prideful of our political opinions, so much so that these opinions have become more important than our fellow human beings.I remember growing up, routinely hearing the phrase, "I might not believe what you believe, but I'll fight for your right to say what you believe".But I don't hear that anymore and haven't heard it in decades. Now what I hear is, "I not only disagree with you, but you're an asshole for believing what you believe, and I'm going to do everything I can to make sure everyone knows what an asshole you are, and we're going to make your life hell." "And make sure you keep your frickin' mouth shut, because if you go around saying any of this stuff, you might get more than just verbal threats, and certainly, you're going to have a tougher time finding a place to live and work; because we don't like your kind of intolerance and hateful speech".
Does blogger import blog entries?
wondering if blogger has a way to "import" blog entries from another site. I'm fairly new to blogger.I have another site (http://ping.fm/0J8Pr) and I'd like to be able to copy the blog entries from the past year that I have there, and get them into my StocktonUnderground blog on blogger. I currently figure the only way to do this is via manual copy and paste.
Tulsa Oiler fans complain, no matter what
Some people just like to complain. I guess I'm one that does as well, but I guess it's easier to see when other people do it. Anyway, I was reading a thread on the Tulsa Oiler fan forums (at http://www.tulsahockey.net/forum/index.php?topic=10716.msg97048) which was about possible attendance in their new arena (the BOK Center, see http://www.bokcenter.com ) and at some point, the discussion went more towards complaining that in previous seasons, the team office gave tickets away for Tuesday evening games. For some reason, this was felt as an insult to some season ticket holders.
The whole point of giving tickets away to Tuesday night games, was to boost attendance, and hopefully interest, in the games. If successful, this would lead to higher ticket sales on other nights, and as it was, those seats were vacant on Tuesday nights.
Baseball teams do this. Why not hockey?
Anyway, I'm a season ticket holder, and I don't really care if they give away tickets for games on nights when attendance is expected to be low anyway. The way I see it, the more fans in the seats, the louder we can make it and the more fun it'll be. Evidently, not all of us share that idea. Some feel that they paid their money, and they resent others getting in for free.
It's not like the free tickets are in the best seating areas. Those free tickets weren't as good as what most season ticket holders have. I like going to the games, having a good vantage point to see, and knowing that I'll have the same seats every game. I get to be friends with the people who sit around me and enjoy their company each game, as opposed to always being strangers to the people next to me (which would probably be the case if I were not a season ticket holder).
It seems to me that the team office is damned if they do and damned if they don't. No matter what they do, someone thinks its wrong and wants to complain about it. I do think it's funny that during the summer when no hockey is being played and we don't have much to talk about, that on the fan message boards, people seem to be hunting for something to discuss, and in the process, some hunt for things to complain about.
The whole point of giving tickets away to Tuesday night games, was to boost attendance, and hopefully interest, in the games. If successful, this would lead to higher ticket sales on other nights, and as it was, those seats were vacant on Tuesday nights.
Baseball teams do this. Why not hockey?
Anyway, I'm a season ticket holder, and I don't really care if they give away tickets for games on nights when attendance is expected to be low anyway. The way I see it, the more fans in the seats, the louder we can make it and the more fun it'll be. Evidently, not all of us share that idea. Some feel that they paid their money, and they resent others getting in for free.
It's not like the free tickets are in the best seating areas. Those free tickets weren't as good as what most season ticket holders have. I like going to the games, having a good vantage point to see, and knowing that I'll have the same seats every game. I get to be friends with the people who sit around me and enjoy their company each game, as opposed to always being strangers to the people next to me (which would probably be the case if I were not a season ticket holder).
It seems to me that the team office is damned if they do and damned if they don't. No matter what they do, someone thinks its wrong and wants to complain about it. I do think it's funny that during the summer when no hockey is being played and we don't have much to talk about, that on the fan message boards, people seem to be hunting for something to discuss, and in the process, some hunt for things to complain about.
Called the mayor to check on the old man
I felt bad leaving the old man after I got him back to his house, but he said he didn't need a doctor and that he'd be fine. However, I called the mayor (since he has lived in our little community from the time it began and knows most everyone, especially the old-timers (like himself)). I didn't get to speak to him, but I did talk with his wife and I told her what happened and that I was concerned about the old man.
After describing to her which house it was, she knew exactly who it was. She said that she and her husband would check on the old man and make sure that he'll be okay. They know the old man and his wife.
After describing to her which house it was, she knew exactly who it was. She said that she and her husband would check on the old man and make sure that he'll be okay. They know the old man and his wife.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
