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)
|