[ciscomgr] Re: mostly quiet on the western front

  • From: tlv <tlv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: ciscomgr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 00:31:13 -0700 (PDT)

On Sun, 6 Oct 2002 WayzNMeanz@xxxxxxx wrote:

> hey guys
> well the inevitable finally occured, jd saw he had been bitch slapped and now 
> he's all pissy about it
> of course, we know he earned it, so whatya gonna do, as ye sow, so shall ye 
> reap
> he basically though asked me why no one had talked to him first blah blah 
> blah, maybe we should give him a reprieve, see below, the problem i see is 
> leopards dont changed their spots, so what good was talking to him about it 
> gonna do? he's pretty much just a mean and grumpy fuker and beyond being 
> salavagable imho
> on the other hand, on the other hand, if he feels that he wasnt given a 
> chance to change, maybe he should get one, so the question i have is, do we 
> give him  second chance? and by that i do not mean he gets on this list, that 
> should never happen, but im talking about his access, im tabling that for 
> discussion, me personally, i think he has earned the rite to lose the access 
> level, but i guess his point that 'no one warned me' is kinda valid to some 
> degree, of course he's a grown up, and we as adults know that actions lead to 
> consequences
> meantime, we havent gotten much feedback yet to the rules etc, we'll give it 
> a few more days, but i think it worked out okay, we were bound to ruffle a 
> few feathers, but in general, seems like no one has any big bitchin to do 
> about em, those they were intended for will just have to deal with it, and 
> those that they have no effect on will just live on

i feel "somewhat" bad that nobody told him but on the other hand i still
think its the right thing to do and i doubt he could change, some stuff is
in your genes and that's it...

> on another note,
> with regards to any new ops, whatya think of this, as far as procedure 
> ,,,,and we let them know all this up front in message or in a private email
> a> probationary period of some length of time, tell them dont be a dick, if 
> the power goatse to their head, and it often does as we know, then they are 
> back to +v or +null
> b> we send them the rules of course, and maybe some additional guidance, 
> which i can spin up
> c> 100 level for probationary ops, then 150-199 once they have passed that 
> test, id make the exsisting worhty ops 200+ , if they arent already, if they 
> have proven unworthy of the privileges afforded by that level, not that its 
> much, they can stay sub 200
> d> let them know that the final decision will be made by everyone with a @ so 
> make sure you get along with everybody, this way we will have a more cohesive 
> channel, of course not everyone is gonna get along with everyone, 
> divisiveness among the ops can happen, seen it before, and its just a cancer, 
> so screw that

yeah that sounds reasonable i think...

> another point, do we need this strict ops thing ? i dont know, seems to be 
> maybe a problem, in the event someone cant login etc, ruperts deal was always 
> a good fallback, i think we could just have a policy of ops opping no one but 
> ops, and if they do, let them hang themselves and we can lay the smackdown on 
> them, i just wanted to table that issue for discussion if i may

who has a problem with it and why ? why would someone be unable to login?
too dumb to type /msg X perhaps ? :) Any examples ? On the other hand i
dont really have a problem removing it again...

> okay sorry for the the littany,,,i know its the weekend >

yeah well its monday morning now... :(

> have a beautiful day :)

can always try but hey its monday :((

> peace \/

and unity...

> r|p

p.s: RJ, please stop sending emails from your cisco account when in fact
you subscribed with another one, or add your cisco one, whatever works
best but this way we need to approve each email fromya :)

Other related posts: