I don't believe it.

Our manager is asking why half his network drives are missing. On 
investigation, I discover the reason: somebody has replaced his existing 
logon script with a brand new one. Written in VB.

You may recall me explaining how the other sites have hundred-line VB 
scripts that do absurd amounts of processing at logon. Well, it seems 
from this latest development that they intend to push this suboptimal 
"solution" onto everybody.

I am so damned *angry* that they would **** around with my systems 
without even bothering to warn me. And the thing is, their fancy, whizzy 
logon script doesn't *work* properly! And that leaves me with two choices:

1. Wade through a few miles of VB in an attempt to figure out why their 
overcomplicated script is broken.

2. Revert it back to the 3-line logon script that I wrote which works 
properly.

Option #1 is clearly unsatisfactory, and option #2 is likely to get me 
yelled at. I love my job...

Post a reply to this message

Lol, I'd be in the wars at your place. :)

 Just change it back to your script.

   ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:46:36 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>
>Option #1 is clearly unsatisfactory, and option #2 is likely to get me 
>yelled at. I love my job...

Make your boss earn his money. Ask for an executive decision.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> Lol, I'd be in the wars at your place. :)
> 
>  Just change it back to your script.

Clearly they changed it to add a new drive. If I change it back, we'll 
lose that drive. (Although I can easily add it to my script.)

It just makes me angry that they can just silently *change* stuff like 
this without warning me. Now when somebody's login script falls over, I 
have *no clue* what the problem is. Thanks, guys.

I'm also currently fighting a procedure document problem. Our director 
of IT has noticed that I recently revised two local UK procedure 
documents, so he wants those to be "retired immediately".

Still, our QA manager suggested that he was going to reply to that 
particular request in two words - only one of which is inoffensive. 
(After all, there's nothing wrong with "off"...) It seems I'm not the 
only one who's irritated.

Post a reply to this message

>> Option #1 is clearly unsatisfactory, and option #2 is likely to get me 
>> yelled at. I love my job...
> 
> Make your boss earn his money. Ask for an executive decision.

You're talking about a man who has a packet of sunflower seeds next to 
his desk. (I'm not making this up.) Can you spell "bird brain"?

In fact, I take that back. It would be an insult to the birds...

I think my plan of action is to not actually *do* anything at this 
point, just ask IT why this was done.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> I'm also currently fighting a procedure document problem. Our director 
> of IT has noticed that I recently revised two local UK procedure 
> documents, so he wants those to be "retired immediately".

"The IT directory must be made aware of all audit findings relating to 
IT so that a proper audit response can be produced."

...because I'm not capable of producing a "proper audit response" all by 
myself?

I'm sorry, maybe I *imagined* that last 6 years... but I could have 
sworn I've been writing "proper audit responses" since before you were 
even employed by this company! :-P

MUST...STOP...TYPING...>_<

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> MUST...STOP...TYPING...>_<

Fortunately, I *removed* that comment from my email before I sent it...

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:13:58 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> St. wrote:
>> Lol, I'd be in the wars at your place. :)
>> 
>>  Just change it back to your script.
> 
> Clearly they changed it to add a new drive. If I change it back, we'll
> lose that drive. (Although I can easily add it to my script.)
> 
> It just makes me angry that they can just silently *change* stuff like
> this without warning me. Now when somebody's login script falls over, I
> have *no clue* what the problem is. Thanks, guys.
> 
> I'm also currently fighting a procedure document problem. Our director
> of IT has noticed that I recently revised two local UK procedure
> documents, so he wants those to be "retired immediately".
> 
> Still, our QA manager suggested that he was going to reply to that
> particular request in two words - only one of which is inoffensive.
> (After all, there's nothing wrong with "off"...) It seems I'm not the
> only one who's irritated.

Use that to your advantage.  Seriously.  That the QA manager is upset 
about this as well gives you additional leverage to say "this is what my 
procedures are supposed to prevent, but nobody follows them and now the 
users are being affected by these random changes being introduced into 
the systems by the other admins without them telling me about it".

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:23:18 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> Invisible wrote:
> 
>> I'm also currently fighting a procedure document problem. Our director
>> of IT has noticed that I recently revised two local UK procedure
>> documents, so he wants those to be "retired immediately".
> 
> "The IT directory must be made aware of all audit findings relating to
> IT so that a proper audit response can be produced."
> 
> ...because I'm not capable of producing a "proper audit response" all by
> myself?
> 
> I'm sorry, maybe I *imagined* that last 6 years... but I could have
> sworn I've been writing "proper audit responses" since before you were
> even employed by this company! :-P
> 
> MUST...STOP...TYPING...>_<

Provide them with copies of your previous audit responses and reports.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> 1. Wade through a few miles of VB in an attempt to figure out why their 
> overcomplicated script is broken.
> 
> 2. Revert it back to the 3-line logon script that I wrote which works 
> properly.
> 
> Option #1 is clearly unsatisfactory, and option #2 is likely to get me 
> yelled at. I love my job...

3. Tell your boss hackers broke into the system and you need to shut 
everything down and clean up the damage done.



-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> It just makes me angry that they can just silently *change* stuff like 
> this without warning me. Now when somebody's login script falls over, I 
> have *no clue* what the problem is. Thanks, guys.

Can't you change the passwords used to get into the systems there? If not, 
you need to put into writing that you can't be responsible for the systems 
if you can't control them.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message

>> It just makes me angry that they can just silently *change* stuff like 
>> this without warning me. Now when somebody's login script falls over, 
>> I have *no clue* what the problem is. Thanks, guys.
> 
> Can't you change the passwords used to get into the systems there?

No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what those 
are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.

> If 
> not, you need to put into writing that you can't be responsible for the 
> systems if you can't control them.

Heh, yeah. Something like that...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what those 
> are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.

If you have the passwords for the routers, then you have the passwords. :-)

>> If not, you need to put into writing that you can't be responsible for 
>> the systems if you can't control them.
> 
> Heh, yeah. Something like that...

Seriously. You should write up what's going on and send it to your boss, his 
boss, and so on up the line. Explain they're crashing your systems and you 
have no control over it, and ask them what the appropriate procedure should 
be for violation of procedures.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message

> I am so damned *angry* that they would **** around with my systems without 
> even bothering to warn me. And the thing is, their fancy, whizzy

Why don't you try and do something about this rather than just writing on 
here what's going on?  If your boss isn't listening go higher up until 
someone does listen.  If nobody listens, document it and do your own thing 
(ie block them from modifying your systems), then they will be forced to 
listen to you.

Post a reply to this message

>> No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what those 
>> are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.
> 
> If you have the passwords for the routers, then you have the passwords. :-)

But I *don't* have the passwords for the routers.

> Seriously. You should write up what's going on and send it to your boss, 
> his boss, and so on up the line. Explain they're crashing your systems 
> and you have no control over it, and ask them what the appropriate 
> procedure should be for violation of procedures.

Nobody will care. If I say "they did X, which caused a problem", 
everybody will assume I don't know what I'm talking about.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Why don't you try and do something about this rather than just writing 
> on here what's going on?  If your boss isn't listening go higher up 
> until someone does listen.  If nobody listens, document it and do your 
> own thing (ie block them from modifying your systems), then they will be 
> forced to listen to you.

1. Nobody with any authority cares about my opinion. The general 
assumption is that I know nothing about anything.

2. How did such technically unskilled people get into senior IT 
positions? They did it by being good at company politics. If I try to 
play that game, they will beat me.

3. I have no power to block anything.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:37:20 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what those  
>>> are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.
>>  If you have the passwords for the routers, then you have the  
>> passwords. :-)
>
> But I *don't* have the passwords for the routers.

If you have physical access to the routers, then you make the passwords.


>> Seriously. You should write up what's going on and send it to your  
>> boss, his boss, and so on up the line. Explain they're crashing your  
>> systems and you have no control over it, and ask them what the  
>> appropriate procedure should be for violation of procedures.
>
> Nobody will care. If I say "they did X, which caused a problem",  
> everybody will assume I don't know what I'm talking about.

It does not matter what they assume or even what they choose to do about  
it. What matters is creating a paper trail to cover your own ass.



-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

On 26-2-2009 22:38, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> scott wrote:
>> Why don't you try and do something about this rather than just writing 
>> on here what's going on?  If your boss isn't listening go higher up 
>> until someone does listen.  If nobody listens, document it and do your 
>> own thing (ie block them from modifying your systems), then they will 
>> be forced to listen to you.
> 
> 1. Nobody with any authority cares about my opinion. The general 
> assumption is that I know nothing about anything.

As fredrik said, and he is the Nth to do so (N>5), you need a paper 
trail. Part of your job is to look out for violations of the protocols. 
If you don't report them you can be held responsible because you were 
not doing your job. If you report and they choose to ignore that, it is 
their problem.

> 2. How did such technically unskilled people get into senior IT 
> positions? They did it by being good at company politics. If I try to 
> play that game, they will beat me.

It is not about politics, it is about whether your company is violating 
the law or not.

> 3. I have no power to block anything.

You do, but you choose not to use them.

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:21:01 +0100, Fredrik Eriksson wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:37:20 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>>> No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what those
>>>> are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.
>>>  If you have the passwords for the routers, then you have the
>>> passwords. :-)
>>
>> But I *don't* have the passwords for the routers.
> 
> If you have physical access to the routers, then you make the passwords.
> 
> 
>>> Seriously. You should write up what's going on and send it to your
>>> boss, his boss, and so on up the line. Explain they're crashing your
>>> systems and you have no control over it, and ask them what the
>>> appropriate procedure should be for violation of procedures.
>>
>> Nobody will care. If I say "they did X, which caused a problem",
>> everybody will assume I don't know what I'm talking about.
> 
> It does not matter what they assume or even what they choose to do about
> it. What matters is creating a paper trail to cover your own ass.

Exactly what I was going to say.

Andy, write the damn paper trail already!

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 2/26/2009 1:38 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 3. I have no power to block anything.

It's a fact that, when hired to do a job, you have the authority to 
perform it (assuming the person hiring you had the authority to hire 
you, of course).

If they get in the way, do your job anyway, and document it.

If they get mad at you for making necessary changes, even to the point 
of firing you, keep the paper trail for future reference (other 
employers will ask about what happened... having it documented is 
absolutely vital).

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:21:01 +0100, Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:37:20 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>>>> No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what those
>>>>> are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.
>>>>  If you have the passwords for the routers, then you have the
>>>> passwords. :-)
>>> But I *don't* have the passwords for the routers.
>> If you have physical access to the routers, then you make the passwords.
>>
>>
>>>> Seriously. You should write up what's going on and send it to your
>>>> boss, his boss, and so on up the line. Explain they're crashing your
>>>> systems and you have no control over it, and ask them what the
>>>> appropriate procedure should be for violation of procedures.
>>> Nobody will care. If I say "they did X, which caused a problem",
>>> everybody will assume I don't know what I'm talking about.
>> It does not matter what they assume or even what they choose to do about
>> it. What matters is creating a paper trail to cover your own ass.
> 
> Exactly what I was going to say.
> 
> Andy, write the damn paper trail already!
> 
> Jim


he has - it's right here... too bad it isn't anything official.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:36:53 -0500, Tom Austin wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:21:01 +0100, Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:37:20 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> No. They have all the master passwords; I don't even know what
>>>>>> those are. So they can lock me out, but not the reverse.
>>>>>  If you have the passwords for the routers, then you have the
>>>>> passwords. :-)
>>>> But I *don't* have the passwords for the routers.
>>> If you have physical access to the routers, then you make the
>>> passwords.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Seriously. You should write up what's going on and send it to your
>>>>> boss, his boss, and so on up the line. Explain they're crashing your
>>>>> systems and you have no control over it, and ask them what the
>>>>> appropriate procedure should be for violation of procedures.
>>>> Nobody will care. If I say "they did X, which caused a problem",
>>>> everybody will assume I don't know what I'm talking about.
>>> It does not matter what they assume or even what they choose to do
>>> about it. What matters is creating a paper trail to cover your own
>>> ass.
>> 
>> Exactly what I was going to say.
>> 
>> Andy, write the damn paper trail already!
>> 
>> Jim
> 
> 
> he has - it's right here... too bad it isn't anything official.

Yeah, that would make it a bit difficult to use in court.  "Yes, I'm 
'Invisible', and 'Orchid XP v3', m'lud."

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Option #1 is clearly unsatisfactory, and option #2 is likely to get
>>> me yelled at. I love my job...
>>
>> Make your boss earn his money. Ask for an executive decision.
> 
> You're talking about a man who has a packet of sunflower seeds next to
> his desk. (I'm not making this up.) Can you spell "bird brain"?
> 
> In fact, I take that back. It would be an insult to the birds...
> 
> I think my plan of action is to not actually *do* anything at this
> point, just ask IT why this was done.

Don't care about that, just send him an email explaining this all,
writing it as easy and self-explaining to read as possible. Make him do
the decision - you can tell him your opinion, but make sure it's his
call to decide. If you ask from him, you're doing it right, making sure
you're not violating (new) company policies yourself. And do it via
email to make sure it's written down, not just spoken.

Follow these two steps and you are fine:
Step 1: save your own ass properly
Step 2: be profitable for the company

-Aero

Post a reply to this message