From: Greg Ercolano <erco@(email surpressed)>
Subject: Re: Disabling FU
   Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2004 16:26:34 -0800
Msg# 451
View Complete Thread (8 articles) | All Threads
Last Next
Steve Kochak wrote:
<rant>
I would like the option to disable the FU option for users that clearly don't understand that they are not the most important people in the company and that everyone's job is important.
</rant>

	I'll be implementing the annoying users detector in the
	next release; the program logic is:

		if ( user.BeingAnnoying() )
		    { RebootHostBelongingTo(user); }

	;)

	You should let peer pressure work for you; when a problem
	comes up, simply audit the logs to see who knocked their
	priority up beyond what they should, and advertise it to
	everyone who was affected.

	This only works if there's a clear policy for setting
	priorities.

	Basically, work with the 'problem users' to find out why
	they keep breaking the policy, and modify the policy until
	it works for everyone.

	But a clear policy for priority has to be established, or
	anarchy will always result.

	I can help you if these users are posing challenging responses
	to the existing policy.

	Normally the users who break policy have some driving reason,
	because the current policy isn't working, and often the pressures
	on them are legitimate.

	It's a matter of coming up with a policy that takes into account
	the demands of production. Find out what the demands are, and then
	determine a policy that works, and advertise it clearly in a web
	page and/or email.

	It's the only way to bring sanity.
	This means, however, having a good understanding of the priority
	mechanism (staircasing priorities, when to use high, low, and
	killer priorities)

	If you need help, bring me into the conversations, and I can
	help you come up with a policy.


--
Greg Ercolano, erco@(email surpressed)
Rush Render Queue, http://seriss.com/rush/
Tel: (Tel# suppressed)
Cel: (Tel# suppressed)
Fax: (Tel# suppressed)

Last Next