My birthday is on Friday, and I'm turning forty. Birthdays tend to be a time to reflect on a life and see where you stand after another year, but forty is a bigger milestone. It's basically a centerpoint since your average lifespan on this rock is around eighty years. Hence, I've been really thinking lately about what I wanted to do with my life and whether I've actually done that or not.
The biggest thing in my life has been my family, and to that end, I've been very successful. Been happily married for sixteen years, and my children are doing very well. I know what it takes to be married and how to stay that way. I know that it takes compromise and the desire to remain in a relationship in order to succeed, and I have been able to see where people have failed in that regard. I've always been a bit of a loner, but being in a solid relationship for what amounts to almost eighteen years (when you count the dating aspect of our relationship), I have a decent handle on what makes one work.
Moving past the relationship, however, I'm a failure. I have been in a job for the last eight years, and I've been successful in it because I'm exceptionally smart. That's about it. I probably the only one in my position without a college degree because I can just do what I need to, and I do it better than anyone else. Why don't I have a college degree? Because this isn't what I wanted to do, and it still isn't. I'm in the job I have to have in order to survive.
With everything else I do, when I run down the laundry list of what I've done, it sounds very impressive. I've written three full musicals and one was staged. I've had a play performed. I've published four books, and I've written dozens if not hundreds of songs. I can play lots of instruments, though my preference always falls to piano, and I can even play and sing at the same time. I've written a lot of screenplays, and I even produced and directed a couple of them. I've written the soundtracks for not only my movies, but also two others. I've recorded a ton of music which I arranged and performed. But none of that actually means anything since none of it is a living.
So I have written four books, and am wrapping up a fifth, which is the fourth in a series I'm writing. I've self-published all of them because no publisher is interested. People who have read them are enthusiastic, but they don't sell because it is not well known. This is what I want to do, and the world just doesn't want me to do it.
The musicals are all old, and I've never done anything further in that area because no one wants to hear any of it. They want stuff they know from people they've heard of. Unknowns get no attention.
Screenplays are fun, but again, unless you're established, no one cares.
I perform as a musician regularly in public at my church, and it's fun enough. Of course, that doesn't pay so there is no living there. Just to have some measure of success, I've written a lot of worship related songs, but my worship leader is not interested in them either. I can't even give away my work.
So I've a rousing success in the personal department. But I'm an absolute and unequivocal failure professionally. My epitaph will be "He never stopped trying." Trying is all I have though.
People pay attention to kids who appear to be very talented, and they believe that with so much talent, that kid will certainly do well. Well, here is a guy on the far side of that equation bursting at the seams with a ridiculous amount of talent, and you know what? No one cares. It doesn't matter one lick how much talent you have. I don't even have to give some random made-up example about someone with a lot of talent failing because I am that person. Everyone I meet remarks how talented I am, but it doesn't mean anything. If anything, being that talented alienates me from everyone else because no one has any idea how to relate to me. Being that talented has hurt me more than it has helped because there are very few people out there like me. When one has no experience with someone who has such an overarching talent range, they treat you just like everyone else.
You know what? I'm not everyone else. I never have been. It sounds stupid to say I'm special, but that's what it boils down to. Everyone has their specialties, and some people actually get to use them. I get to use what those in charge designate as useful and they waste the rest.
I want to be done, but that would be succumbing to failure. I don't want to be a failure. I don't.
But I am.
Showing posts with label Work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Work. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Meeting Nonsense
Long time, no type. Today, I have the wonderful "priviledge" of spending my entire day in a meeting. Not just any meeting, but basically, the company is having everyone go through the training that the new hires go through since the new hire training has significantly improved to the point that even tenured people wanted to know what was in it.
I managed to sit at a table of die hard workaholics who are the most boring group of people I've had the misfortune of sitting with. I'm basically stuck in the middle of contract chatter and meeting scheduling chats. It's no wonder people feel so tired since they can never seem to turn it off and relax.
But of course, these are the same people who obsess over conference calls and the need to "talk it out" instead of allowing one to process their rapid fire and type it out in a concise and storable manner.
And to make it worse, we are only half way through it. At the very least, I can honestly say it is meeting my expectations. I expected to learn a thing or two that I didn't know, but figured that none of it would have any value in my day to day job.
So far, so good.
Friday, December 13, 2013
Queries
Man, when I'm on a roll, I don't stop, and when I stop, it's cold turkey, isn't it? I've thought of lots of post topics over the past few weeks, but the time to write them down always eludes me. That's always a problem for me: finding the time. I know you make time for what's important, and that should indicate that this blog isn't that important. I like to write on it and chronicle what I'm up to, but in the end, there are more important things that I have to do, but at the same time, I enjoy writing on it, and I wish I had more time to do it, and isn't this a ridiculously long run-on sentence? If I were proof-reading and revising, I'd probably fix it, but that would only be worth it if I knew someone read it.
Anyway,my thoughts of the moment revolve around a staple of the writing industry: the query letter. I hate these things, but you know, there really isn't a better way to do it. If you have to review hundreds and hundreds of properties every day and pick something that you think will further your livelihood, you've got to have an efficient way to weed through the options. An easy way is via a quick one page letter that tells about the story to see if you feel it or not. If you do, you ask for more. If you don't, you pass on it. They all seem to acknowledge that they just might be passing on the net big thing, but again, there's not time to know, really. You have to pick the best queries and hope for the best.
However, as the person on the other side of that letter, I am faced with endless rejections. I know it's because I have a weakness when it comes to selling anything. I understand that a query letter is you trying to sell yourself to someone, and while some people can sell ice to an eskimo, I couldn't sell water to dehydrated guy in the desert. I can be persuasive in my own way, but when it comes to outright selling something, I'm absolutely terrible. Hence, all my queries are rejected.
Now, I can tell about my story in my letters. I give all the basic, pertinent information. I can give a succinct synopsis. I can make it all very well-written and have it make perfect sense to the reader. But I fail on buzzwording someone into buying. I know that's what my queries lack, but I feel incapable of figuring out what that hump is that I can't jump over.
Anyway,my thoughts of the moment revolve around a staple of the writing industry: the query letter. I hate these things, but you know, there really isn't a better way to do it. If you have to review hundreds and hundreds of properties every day and pick something that you think will further your livelihood, you've got to have an efficient way to weed through the options. An easy way is via a quick one page letter that tells about the story to see if you feel it or not. If you do, you ask for more. If you don't, you pass on it. They all seem to acknowledge that they just might be passing on the net big thing, but again, there's not time to know, really. You have to pick the best queries and hope for the best.
However, as the person on the other side of that letter, I am faced with endless rejections. I know it's because I have a weakness when it comes to selling anything. I understand that a query letter is you trying to sell yourself to someone, and while some people can sell ice to an eskimo, I couldn't sell water to dehydrated guy in the desert. I can be persuasive in my own way, but when it comes to outright selling something, I'm absolutely terrible. Hence, all my queries are rejected.
Now, I can tell about my story in my letters. I give all the basic, pertinent information. I can give a succinct synopsis. I can make it all very well-written and have it make perfect sense to the reader. But I fail on buzzwording someone into buying. I know that's what my queries lack, but I feel incapable of figuring out what that hump is that I can't jump over.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Life Insurance
It's that time of year again: time for annual insurance enrollment, where the powers that be decide that you can change how your insurance plans are setup. It's also where if you decide you want to keep what you have, but don't do anything, they automatically give you the top tier plan. It happened to me. I don't understand it.
Anyway, in the course of looking over the options, I ran across something I've seen on there every year since I started: the life insurance. I've never taken it. You know, when you buy something, you get it with the express purpose of using it or expecting to use it at some point. It's there if you need it, but the point is that you're the end user of the product. Life insurance doesn't work that way. It's a monetary value of what your life is worth to everyone around you, so that if you happen to lose it for whatever reason, they can have some solace in the idea that they are very well paid in your sudden absence (and can pay for the funeral and plot of ground that will house your mortal remains).
I stared at the options for a very long time, and so far, I've not brought myself to make a choice. This is my sixth time to have said choice at my present employer, and I just can't. To make matters worse, there are separate options for you and your spouse. This means that you can choose yourself or your significant other but you don't have to pick both if you don't want to. That sort of choice makes you face the fact that your life has a limit to it. We don't like to think about that, but at some point somewhere down the road, it's going to end.
I want to pretend I'm different. I've bared aged in awhile, but pondering this makes me admit that it'll happen. I still act and feel quite young, and to be honest, I act younger than most people my age. They and those even younger complain about all kinds of "old people" stuff, but not me. No, I will live until Jesus comes.
Part of me feels like if I decide to make the election for either myself or the Queen, it's like an invitation for the end. If I choose only me, that feels responsible. If I choose only her, that makes me feel like I'm asking for her to pop off (which makes me a bit of a jerk, if you're keeping score). If I go with both, I wonder about the children since that sort of preps us both for the long sleep.
It's a question for which there is no scientific answer, and one that theology can't agree upon. What does happen? Christianity mostly says if you're good (and follow Jesus), you go straight to heaven, while if you're anything else, you're in eternal damnation. Others say it's a sleep, of sorts, until God's return when you're risen to be judged, and either insert prior heaven and hell notions or the good join him, while the not-so-good return to the ground for eternal death. Some believe in ghosts being spirits of the dearly departed trapped on our plane instead of wherever, and others believe in reincarnation where you just keep coming back. But the non-religious types would just say once you're dead, you're dead.
As for me, I keep an open mind. I believe in God and Jesus, and know that there is a place prepared for the great beyond, but I can't really quantify it. The promise of eternal life is there, and I do believe that, but it remains an unknown, and I feel like there is more to do here. The Parable of the Ten Talents always weighs upon me, and I don't want to be the guy caught having squandered his life.
What will I do about my insurance quandry? Well, I'm not really superstitious, but I don't know. I still feel like electing something is just asking for trouble. Yet, responsibility would say that not electing is reckless. And so the debate will ever rage inside my head.
Anyway, in the course of looking over the options, I ran across something I've seen on there every year since I started: the life insurance. I've never taken it. You know, when you buy something, you get it with the express purpose of using it or expecting to use it at some point. It's there if you need it, but the point is that you're the end user of the product. Life insurance doesn't work that way. It's a monetary value of what your life is worth to everyone around you, so that if you happen to lose it for whatever reason, they can have some solace in the idea that they are very well paid in your sudden absence (and can pay for the funeral and plot of ground that will house your mortal remains).
I stared at the options for a very long time, and so far, I've not brought myself to make a choice. This is my sixth time to have said choice at my present employer, and I just can't. To make matters worse, there are separate options for you and your spouse. This means that you can choose yourself or your significant other but you don't have to pick both if you don't want to. That sort of choice makes you face the fact that your life has a limit to it. We don't like to think about that, but at some point somewhere down the road, it's going to end.
I want to pretend I'm different. I've bared aged in awhile, but pondering this makes me admit that it'll happen. I still act and feel quite young, and to be honest, I act younger than most people my age. They and those even younger complain about all kinds of "old people" stuff, but not me. No, I will live until Jesus comes.
Part of me feels like if I decide to make the election for either myself or the Queen, it's like an invitation for the end. If I choose only me, that feels responsible. If I choose only her, that makes me feel like I'm asking for her to pop off (which makes me a bit of a jerk, if you're keeping score). If I go with both, I wonder about the children since that sort of preps us both for the long sleep.
It's a question for which there is no scientific answer, and one that theology can't agree upon. What does happen? Christianity mostly says if you're good (and follow Jesus), you go straight to heaven, while if you're anything else, you're in eternal damnation. Others say it's a sleep, of sorts, until God's return when you're risen to be judged, and either insert prior heaven and hell notions or the good join him, while the not-so-good return to the ground for eternal death. Some believe in ghosts being spirits of the dearly departed trapped on our plane instead of wherever, and others believe in reincarnation where you just keep coming back. But the non-religious types would just say once you're dead, you're dead.
As for me, I keep an open mind. I believe in God and Jesus, and know that there is a place prepared for the great beyond, but I can't really quantify it. The promise of eternal life is there, and I do believe that, but it remains an unknown, and I feel like there is more to do here. The Parable of the Ten Talents always weighs upon me, and I don't want to be the guy caught having squandered his life.
What will I do about my insurance quandry? Well, I'm not really superstitious, but I don't know. I still feel like electing something is just asking for trouble. Yet, responsibility would say that not electing is reckless. And so the debate will ever rage inside my head.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Dumbest Reason I Was Ever Fired
You know, in my life, I've had quite a few jobs. Some were good. Some were bad. And from most of them, I was unceremoniously "let go" for one reason or another. Most of the time, it was something absolutely stupid, or I messed up in some way that they just sacked me over. However, for no reason in particular today, my mind wandered to what I consider to be one of the dumbest reasons I was ever fired.
For the Queen's sanity, I will note that my present job in not in the remotest bit of jeopardy.
Anyway, at the time in question, I had applied for a job via a temp agency and landed me a not half bad data entry position. At the time, it was a pretty decent job, so I was content enough to have gotten it. On my second day there, some kind of discussion started over jobs and such, and however the discussion got there, I remarked that there has to be a reason to fire you. Employers can't just up and fire you for no reason.
To prove they certainly could, they up and fired me for no reason. Seriously. The person from the temp agency asked what happened, and I told her about the discussion, and she said that as a temp, they could decide not to keep and basically fire me on a whim. So they did. Just to prove a point.
Obviously, the take away from this experience was never tell your employer what they can or can't do. They'll show you exactly just how much power they possess. I suppose it didn't help that I'd only been there a day when that discussion happened.
I promise you it never happened again. That's for sure.
For the Queen's sanity, I will note that my present job in not in the remotest bit of jeopardy.
Anyway, at the time in question, I had applied for a job via a temp agency and landed me a not half bad data entry position. At the time, it was a pretty decent job, so I was content enough to have gotten it. On my second day there, some kind of discussion started over jobs and such, and however the discussion got there, I remarked that there has to be a reason to fire you. Employers can't just up and fire you for no reason.
To prove they certainly could, they up and fired me for no reason. Seriously. The person from the temp agency asked what happened, and I told her about the discussion, and she said that as a temp, they could decide not to keep and basically fire me on a whim. So they did. Just to prove a point.
Obviously, the take away from this experience was never tell your employer what they can or can't do. They'll show you exactly just how much power they possess. I suppose it didn't help that I'd only been there a day when that discussion happened.
I promise you it never happened again. That's for sure.
Friday, October 25, 2013
How to Completely Derail a Problem Discussion
So, you're in a situation be it via email or conference call discussing some kind of problem which has arisen. The issue has been established, and people are working to get to the heart of the matter by attempting to sort out what needs to be done and who needs to do it. Somewhere, someone returns to the source of the original information in an attempt to figure out the intent or perhaps the mindset behind some level of advisement.
Then, out of no where, someone asks why, but it's a why something happened that can only be speculation and its answer has no bearing on the actual problem or its solution. It usually amounts to a bit of the blame game when it happens because someone asks why you asked so-n-so, or why someone did that thing they did. Where most questions to that point had flowed in a completely logical fashion, the right-field "why" kinks it all, and since no one wants to admit that they don't care, the conversation ends up completely derailed with guesswork and speculation.
When I'm looking to solve a problem, I keep it simple: what did you want it to do, or what sort of solution are you looking for? Never have I asked why they did it or why someone was bothered about it. Sometimes I wonder, but I know that it just comes off as accusatory and most of the time, it adds far more time to any discussion that I can spend doing something else.
The most recent eyeroller had to do with a discussion over how something worked, and really, it wasn't my specialty anyway. They had possibly misunderstood the original info and added the original people onto the email. The original person derailed the entire conversation by asking why the asker asked my group instead of, you know, just answering their question to him. Then the email string went off the deep end never returning to its original topic.
Seriously, there are questions with irrelevant answers. Some say there are no stupid questions, but I assure you there are. They are just trying to spark discussion when they say that. In fact, there are hosts of stupid, pointless and irrelevant questions that should never be asked in a group setting. If you are about to ask a question that will not, in any way, benefit the group, don't ask it. If you are asking a question that you are throwing out for the direct purpose of blaming someone else for something, don't ask it. If you feel like you have to lead the question with an apology, don't ask it. And finally, if you think your questions requires a disclaimer, either don't ask it or don't provide the disclaimer. Seriously, no one cares.
And finally, to clear up another fallacy: the customer is not always right. Ask anyone in technical support.
Then, out of no where, someone asks why, but it's a why something happened that can only be speculation and its answer has no bearing on the actual problem or its solution. It usually amounts to a bit of the blame game when it happens because someone asks why you asked so-n-so, or why someone did that thing they did. Where most questions to that point had flowed in a completely logical fashion, the right-field "why" kinks it all, and since no one wants to admit that they don't care, the conversation ends up completely derailed with guesswork and speculation.
When I'm looking to solve a problem, I keep it simple: what did you want it to do, or what sort of solution are you looking for? Never have I asked why they did it or why someone was bothered about it. Sometimes I wonder, but I know that it just comes off as accusatory and most of the time, it adds far more time to any discussion that I can spend doing something else.
The most recent eyeroller had to do with a discussion over how something worked, and really, it wasn't my specialty anyway. They had possibly misunderstood the original info and added the original people onto the email. The original person derailed the entire conversation by asking why the asker asked my group instead of, you know, just answering their question to him. Then the email string went off the deep end never returning to its original topic.
Seriously, there are questions with irrelevant answers. Some say there are no stupid questions, but I assure you there are. They are just trying to spark discussion when they say that. In fact, there are hosts of stupid, pointless and irrelevant questions that should never be asked in a group setting. If you are about to ask a question that will not, in any way, benefit the group, don't ask it. If you are asking a question that you are throwing out for the direct purpose of blaming someone else for something, don't ask it. If you feel like you have to lead the question with an apology, don't ask it. And finally, if you think your questions requires a disclaimer, either don't ask it or don't provide the disclaimer. Seriously, no one cares.
And finally, to clear up another fallacy: the customer is not always right. Ask anyone in technical support.
Thursday, October 24, 2013
The Turning Of A Page
You ever get something that is somewhat mundane in nature, and yet for reasons unexplained, the creators of said object have placed an inordinate amount of work into some feature that provides no real value or functionality? When you look at most things, everything serves some kind of purpose, even colors which provide some aesthetic value. Most of the time, companies won't waste their time in tossing in stuff that is completely pointless.
Today, I saw an email that contained a link to our annual benefits novel, which was provided as an online doc rather than cutting down a forest to send it to everyone (which I'm sure they've done anyway). It opened up in this e-reader, similar to what I've seen used by store ads online. I'm sure you've seen these before. You hover your mouse in the lower corner of the "page", the page reacts and you can drag it over like you're turning a real page (you know, instead of clicking the little right arrow at the bottom of the screen like a sane user).
I caught the sound out of the tinny speaker in the CPU (since I really don't care about sound on my work computer; that's what headphones are for). Yeah, in this benefits document that 90% of the users will read at work, they bothered to take the extra time and expense to include a page turning sound. I can't even imagine how many man-hours went into this extremely minor and utterly pointless detail. I suppose that's my insurance premiums at work.
Every since then, I've been looking for something to compare how absolutely pointless that sound is, and I got nothing. There is literally nothing I can think of off the top of my head that would hold less consumer value than the sound of a turning page in an online benefits manual. There's a new simile for you.
That's as useless as the sound of a turning page in an ebook. And yet, that page turn sound will still be more pointless than whatever you compared it to.
Today, I saw an email that contained a link to our annual benefits novel, which was provided as an online doc rather than cutting down a forest to send it to everyone (which I'm sure they've done anyway). It opened up in this e-reader, similar to what I've seen used by store ads online. I'm sure you've seen these before. You hover your mouse in the lower corner of the "page", the page reacts and you can drag it over like you're turning a real page (you know, instead of clicking the little right arrow at the bottom of the screen like a sane user).
I caught the sound out of the tinny speaker in the CPU (since I really don't care about sound on my work computer; that's what headphones are for). Yeah, in this benefits document that 90% of the users will read at work, they bothered to take the extra time and expense to include a page turning sound. I can't even imagine how many man-hours went into this extremely minor and utterly pointless detail. I suppose that's my insurance premiums at work.
Every since then, I've been looking for something to compare how absolutely pointless that sound is, and I got nothing. There is literally nothing I can think of off the top of my head that would hold less consumer value than the sound of a turning page in an online benefits manual. There's a new simile for you.
That's as useless as the sound of a turning page in an ebook. And yet, that page turn sound will still be more pointless than whatever you compared it to.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
A Social Experiment
The best part about having an anonymous blog is the ability to write about things around me, and no one knows I'm the perpetrator of such things. In this instance, the Queen decided to make me do something in my office that I would, under every other circumstance, never do or participate in. At her workplace, she got this "Boo" thing for Halloween, and was instructed to pass it on, as it were. She decided that I should place one in my workplace too to see what happens. I initially balked at the idea since I just work at work, and don't care about "spirit" nonsense. My motivation is the 2 week paycheck and that's all I need.
However, after some thought, being the progenitor of the action, I figured it would be amusing to see how it plays out, so I gave considerable thought to who I should give this little seed to in order to have the best chance of it taking off. Since I get there very early in the morning, I can pretty much choose who I want. I made my selection of someone I think will actually do it, and has the added bonus of being within earshot (but not eyeshot) of my cubical. I don't normally associate with this person at all - not in the same department or running circles or anything. Hence, the chances that I will be a suspect (besides the fact that I never participate in anything) is so ridiculously low, it's almost amusing.
I made the delivery, and the person arrived about 45 minutes later. They talked to the person in the cube next to them (which I knew they would, since they converse often) who, of course, took no credit for the placement of the item. They pondered who might, but weren't certain since they had no idea when it arrived.
They returned to the topic maybe an hour later, again, kind of wondering where it came from and what the purpose was. Now, the item is little more than a cup of candy, but it has a note that says to do the same for someone else and place it without getting caught. Not only is the conversation amusing, but the overall experiment will be fascinating to track.
We seeded this with one item and instructions to keep it going. How far will it go? Will it take off at all? Will I actually get one myself at some point? What will be the overall results of breaking up the monotony with one random element from what amounts to a random source? They suggested it might be a "spirit thing," and that's not a bad idea, after all, but we all know that I would never be on a spirit committee (insert shudder here).
As the day went on, I gathered from the tone of voice I heard and such that this person was actually a little freaked out by the existence of this random element, and declared they had no idea what to do with it (despite the fact that it contained instructions to "Boo" someone else). They asked people on the spirit committee continuing to declare she didn't know what to do, and of course, they weren't aware of it.
What this means is that my clever choice was probably the worst one I could have made. Rather than the leader I took this person for, they appear to be a total follower unable to make an independent decision. It may not go anywhere. Oh well. I will simply sit back and watch to see how and if it unfolds at all.
However, after some thought, being the progenitor of the action, I figured it would be amusing to see how it plays out, so I gave considerable thought to who I should give this little seed to in order to have the best chance of it taking off. Since I get there very early in the morning, I can pretty much choose who I want. I made my selection of someone I think will actually do it, and has the added bonus of being within earshot (but not eyeshot) of my cubical. I don't normally associate with this person at all - not in the same department or running circles or anything. Hence, the chances that I will be a suspect (besides the fact that I never participate in anything) is so ridiculously low, it's almost amusing.
I made the delivery, and the person arrived about 45 minutes later. They talked to the person in the cube next to them (which I knew they would, since they converse often) who, of course, took no credit for the placement of the item. They pondered who might, but weren't certain since they had no idea when it arrived.
They returned to the topic maybe an hour later, again, kind of wondering where it came from and what the purpose was. Now, the item is little more than a cup of candy, but it has a note that says to do the same for someone else and place it without getting caught. Not only is the conversation amusing, but the overall experiment will be fascinating to track.
We seeded this with one item and instructions to keep it going. How far will it go? Will it take off at all? Will I actually get one myself at some point? What will be the overall results of breaking up the monotony with one random element from what amounts to a random source? They suggested it might be a "spirit thing," and that's not a bad idea, after all, but we all know that I would never be on a spirit committee (insert shudder here).
As the day went on, I gathered from the tone of voice I heard and such that this person was actually a little freaked out by the existence of this random element, and declared they had no idea what to do with it (despite the fact that it contained instructions to "Boo" someone else). They asked people on the spirit committee continuing to declare she didn't know what to do, and of course, they weren't aware of it.
What this means is that my clever choice was probably the worst one I could have made. Rather than the leader I took this person for, they appear to be a total follower unable to make an independent decision. It may not go anywhere. Oh well. I will simply sit back and watch to see how and if it unfolds at all.
Saturday, October 12, 2013
The Most Basic Of Skills
This one made me literally walk away from my computer. Seriously, I was so dumbfounded that I had no words. Where do I begin?
So the other day I was asked to use a program that I maintain to create some sample files for a client using their data so they can have an idea of what sort of data gets returned. Simple enough request. Get it all the time. This little program returns regular old text files named in a variety of ways, but they can all be opened in notepad, which is the most basic text file reader known to man since DOS's "edit" command.
They didn't tell me where to send the files, so I got them all made up and send them to the people in charge of this client's account, and asked if they wanted to send the files or should I and to whom. Where I lost all my words was the response I got back. It read (word for word): "I am unable to open the files. Can you send them to (so-n-so) directly?"
This person cannot open a basic text file. Every program on the planet can see the contents of this file. You can use any word processor on any platform. You could put that file into Unix and still open it. You can open that file and read it in nearly every program that can open a file without any issues at all (well, not Paint, but why would you even try?). The file type is so basic, most email programs won't even block it, and this person can't open it.
We live in a computer age where opening programs is a part of daily life. I could send this file to my phone and still open it to see its contents. Heck, I could probably text it, and still be able to crack it open. How is it possible this person could not open the files?
I would say it takes all kinds, and I'm sorry, but this is the type of person who would get better reception from a potato than a satellite dish.
Ugh.
So the other day I was asked to use a program that I maintain to create some sample files for a client using their data so they can have an idea of what sort of data gets returned. Simple enough request. Get it all the time. This little program returns regular old text files named in a variety of ways, but they can all be opened in notepad, which is the most basic text file reader known to man since DOS's "edit" command.
They didn't tell me where to send the files, so I got them all made up and send them to the people in charge of this client's account, and asked if they wanted to send the files or should I and to whom. Where I lost all my words was the response I got back. It read (word for word): "I am unable to open the files. Can you send them to (so-n-so) directly?"
This person cannot open a basic text file. Every program on the planet can see the contents of this file. You can use any word processor on any platform. You could put that file into Unix and still open it. You can open that file and read it in nearly every program that can open a file without any issues at all (well, not Paint, but why would you even try?). The file type is so basic, most email programs won't even block it, and this person can't open it.
We live in a computer age where opening programs is a part of daily life. I could send this file to my phone and still open it to see its contents. Heck, I could probably text it, and still be able to crack it open. How is it possible this person could not open the files?
I would say it takes all kinds, and I'm sorry, but this is the type of person who would get better reception from a potato than a satellite dish.
Ugh.
Monday, October 7, 2013
A Solid Piece of Advice
Advice comes from the strangest of places sometimes. There was one piece of advice that I received that stuck with me ever since since hearing it shook me right to the core. It was an absolute bit of truth of biblical proportions, and it came from the unlikeliest of sources.
Back in 2000, I was looking for a job. I answered lots of ads, and ended up in all kinds of weird places that I never went back to. One such place was a renovated QuikTrip near where my parents live, and while this place has had many names before and after this business was there, at the time I walked in through those doors, it was a place that sold vacuum cleaners. I did not know this when I responded to the ad, and like this type of job tends to do, they told me nothing about it over the phone.
I walked in and sat with a room of people curious about the job, and got pitched this job where you get paid for demonstrating a vacuum cleaner for people in their homes. They boasted screening and set appointments, and "all you have to do is" demo a certain number of times and you get paid regardless of whether one sells or not. If you get a sale, you get more. After watching the demo, I figured I had nothing better to do, so I thought I'd see how I did.
If you'd read this blog for any length of time, you can probably guess exactly how that went. Catastrophic failure would be a fairly accurate description. I made exactly bupkis doing this job. The X number of appointments never happened. Ever. In fact, the expectation turned out to be completely unrealistic, and it also turned out that no one ever achieved the sales necessary for the mega payout either. It was setup to look good, and pay as little as possible. Pretty much everyone quit very quickly.
While I was there, however, I was talking to the seedy head sales guy (who looked exactly like a seedy vacuum cleaner salesman), and he asked me about doing something. I can't remember what he asked, but I responded with the gainsay response that one gives when one forgets to do something. I told him that I didn't have time. That's when he said it. Pay attention to this one.
You make time for what's important to you.
When he said that, I just stopped and looked at him. It was as if the entire world of time and things to do just crashed down on top of me. It ripped time from an unreachable shelf and made it something that I controlled, but showed me that the 24 hours I get in a day are mine to do with as I please. There are obligations and options, but when it comes right down to it, I make that decision. This bit of advice ended up being coupled with another piece I got probably the year before or so from just as unlikely a source.
Before I was out of a job, I worked for that Fireplace Company where I lost my eye. At that company there was a guy who was older, but not entirely grizzled yet, who drove the forklift around the yard. again, I don't remember the circumstances of the discussion we were having, but he said I could leave and do something or another. Naturally, we were on the clock in the middle of the work day, so I said I couldn't leave. Then this exchange happened.
"You can do whatever you want," he said.
I paused for a moment, having never considered that very obvious notion, but then cleverly (I thought) responded, "Yeah, but there are consequences."
"Exactly," he said.
What does this add up to? A bit of wisdom that I'll impart to you, my lovely readers, on this Monday. Maybe you know this. Maybe you never thought about it. But within this is a bit of freedom you might not have noticed.
Your life is yours to live as you please. No one controls you. No one can tell you what to do with it. You have the freedom to choose where you spend your time, but of course, some things are more important than others, and you always have to weigh the consequences of doing versus not doing. You will always, however, make the time to do what you feel is important.
If family is important to you, you will find time to spend with them. If you love movies, you'll always be able to find a couple hours to watch one. If you love reading, you'll read. While choosing to do these things, you will choose not to do something else. You will have to live with those consequences. Some consequences are negligible, such as choosing a movie over a video game - your gamerscore might suffer. Some are more severe, such as choosing video games over the family - the relationship might suffer.
But in the end, the choice is yours. What is most important to you?
Back in 2000, I was looking for a job. I answered lots of ads, and ended up in all kinds of weird places that I never went back to. One such place was a renovated QuikTrip near where my parents live, and while this place has had many names before and after this business was there, at the time I walked in through those doors, it was a place that sold vacuum cleaners. I did not know this when I responded to the ad, and like this type of job tends to do, they told me nothing about it over the phone.
I walked in and sat with a room of people curious about the job, and got pitched this job where you get paid for demonstrating a vacuum cleaner for people in their homes. They boasted screening and set appointments, and "all you have to do is" demo a certain number of times and you get paid regardless of whether one sells or not. If you get a sale, you get more. After watching the demo, I figured I had nothing better to do, so I thought I'd see how I did.
If you'd read this blog for any length of time, you can probably guess exactly how that went. Catastrophic failure would be a fairly accurate description. I made exactly bupkis doing this job. The X number of appointments never happened. Ever. In fact, the expectation turned out to be completely unrealistic, and it also turned out that no one ever achieved the sales necessary for the mega payout either. It was setup to look good, and pay as little as possible. Pretty much everyone quit very quickly.
While I was there, however, I was talking to the seedy head sales guy (who looked exactly like a seedy vacuum cleaner salesman), and he asked me about doing something. I can't remember what he asked, but I responded with the gainsay response that one gives when one forgets to do something. I told him that I didn't have time. That's when he said it. Pay attention to this one.
You make time for what's important to you.
When he said that, I just stopped and looked at him. It was as if the entire world of time and things to do just crashed down on top of me. It ripped time from an unreachable shelf and made it something that I controlled, but showed me that the 24 hours I get in a day are mine to do with as I please. There are obligations and options, but when it comes right down to it, I make that decision. This bit of advice ended up being coupled with another piece I got probably the year before or so from just as unlikely a source.
Before I was out of a job, I worked for that Fireplace Company where I lost my eye. At that company there was a guy who was older, but not entirely grizzled yet, who drove the forklift around the yard. again, I don't remember the circumstances of the discussion we were having, but he said I could leave and do something or another. Naturally, we were on the clock in the middle of the work day, so I said I couldn't leave. Then this exchange happened.
"You can do whatever you want," he said.
I paused for a moment, having never considered that very obvious notion, but then cleverly (I thought) responded, "Yeah, but there are consequences."
"Exactly," he said.
What does this add up to? A bit of wisdom that I'll impart to you, my lovely readers, on this Monday. Maybe you know this. Maybe you never thought about it. But within this is a bit of freedom you might not have noticed.
Your life is yours to live as you please. No one controls you. No one can tell you what to do with it. You have the freedom to choose where you spend your time, but of course, some things are more important than others, and you always have to weigh the consequences of doing versus not doing. You will always, however, make the time to do what you feel is important.
If family is important to you, you will find time to spend with them. If you love movies, you'll always be able to find a couple hours to watch one. If you love reading, you'll read. While choosing to do these things, you will choose not to do something else. You will have to live with those consequences. Some consequences are negligible, such as choosing a movie over a video game - your gamerscore might suffer. Some are more severe, such as choosing video games over the family - the relationship might suffer.
But in the end, the choice is yours. What is most important to you?
Saturday, October 5, 2013
If You Can't Trust Your Co-Workers...
Here's some math you've probably never thought about before. Maybe you have and I'm just not giving you enough credit, but for those of you that haven't, consider this. In a seven day period, there are a total of 168 hours. Of those 168 hours, you could spend an average of 56 of them sleeping (if you go with the 8 hours a day - I know that doesn't apply to all of you - I promise there are fingers pointing back at me, too). That leaves you 112 hours.
Your average 40 hour work week will include five 9-hour days (gotta include that lunch hour) along with another hour allowance (at a minimum) for the drive to and from work, if it only takes 30 minutes to get there. Hence, you will spend around 40-50 hours with the people you work with. That leaves you 52 hours to yourself...well, sort of.
You've got to prepare for work in the mornings which will take anywhere from 30-90 minutes depending on how much prep you need. If you go to church, that will eat up anywhere from 2-4 hours, not including prep and drive times. Then there's food preparation, depending on how much you cook at home. The point to all this is that you likely spend just as much time around your co-workers as you do your family at home.
On my desk at work, I've tended to keep some kind of receptacle that holds water (or something equally to less drinkable). I don't secure it or much of anything else, but just assume that my co-workers will just leave it alone. Apparently, this is not an entirely safe thing to do in some environments.
I don't remember the exact circumstances surrounding this conversation, but somehow, I ended up in a very short conversation with someone (probably one of those people who can't handle more than 10 seconds without a work spoken, and also probably in an elevator) and mentioned that I always had a water bottle or something on my desk. He said that I must really trust my co-workers.
This was a guy with that sort of look on his face of absolute conceit, as if he were the best thing that ever happened to any room he entered, and the world grew a little darker when he left. He looked like a prankster. Now, I considered his words over trust, and the only thing that came to my mind was that if you can't trust your co-workers, who can you trust? No, you're not bound to them, but at the same time, you're really stuck with these people every day of your life until you or they move on to something else. Change can always happens, but until it does, you'll be seeing them tomorrow.
There are always those that think it's hilarious to mess with people, and while this can certainly mix things up to keep life interesting, there is always a line in my opinion. You should never interfere with someone's ability to do their job. I knew someone who had a habit of doing "something" to people's computers when they left them unlocked. One that I know of was when he changed someone's screen resolution to 640x480 which completely screwed up the layout of the icons on their desktop, but the worst was when someone unplugged someone else's phone. Our phones are on some complicated network system that I don't fully comprehend, and unplugging the phone caused it to basically reset. They had to call IT and everything to get the line reestablished. This was followed, of course, by a mass email telling everyone not to do that.
I believe you should trust and get along with your co-workers. After all, they're pretty much your second family, and you probably see them more than your main one.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
People Are Thick
Sometimes, people get caught up in their own little world, and reply to business emails with their strong words to impress everyone else on the massive email string without realizing that they sound like a complete idiot because they never bothered to read any of the replies to their previous inquiries. They use acronyms like crazy, especially ETA, which in most cases, also makes them sound like an idiot since they clearly have no idea what it actually stands for (Estimated Time of Arrival, just in case you're one of them, but don't want to admit it).
One individual in particular replied to an email string stating that the formatting was incorrect in a couple of fields due to the existence of decimals and commas. That is all he said about it. I didn't know which fields were affected or what sort of output he needed beyond removing those characters. Add to this that the other people were actively running the files anyway, which would mean that once they get them all done, none of them will work since they're formatted incorrectly. To date, no one has so much as noticed this little plot hole.
Anyway, on Mr. Decimal-Comma, I replied to his email string (it was a double reply since I had to address both his issue and the other one where someone was having trouble running one of the files, see plot hole) asking which fields were affected and what sort of output he wanted. Later that day, he replied again asking if the formatting was complete and for an "eta on when that will be complete". Besides the egregious misuse of the acronym, I had to wonder if he even read what I wrote before since that was literally the next reply. You may note that it does not contain the answer to my question of "which fields are affected."
I cut and pasted my previous question noting that the eta is dependent on his answer to my question. (Note the proper usage of the acronym; if you broke that out and read it in full, the statement would still make sense). I just have to wonder how some of these end up in positions of power when they clearly don't read the communication they receive.
One individual in particular replied to an email string stating that the formatting was incorrect in a couple of fields due to the existence of decimals and commas. That is all he said about it. I didn't know which fields were affected or what sort of output he needed beyond removing those characters. Add to this that the other people were actively running the files anyway, which would mean that once they get them all done, none of them will work since they're formatted incorrectly. To date, no one has so much as noticed this little plot hole.
Anyway, on Mr. Decimal-Comma, I replied to his email string (it was a double reply since I had to address both his issue and the other one where someone was having trouble running one of the files, see plot hole) asking which fields were affected and what sort of output he wanted. Later that day, he replied again asking if the formatting was complete and for an "eta on when that will be complete". Besides the egregious misuse of the acronym, I had to wonder if he even read what I wrote before since that was literally the next reply. You may note that it does not contain the answer to my question of "which fields are affected."
I cut and pasted my previous question noting that the eta is dependent on his answer to my question. (Note the proper usage of the acronym; if you broke that out and read it in full, the statement would still make sense). I just have to wonder how some of these end up in positions of power when they clearly don't read the communication they receive.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Voicemails Are A Waste Of Time
Not all the time, mind you. Sometimes, the best thing to leave is a voicemail for one reason or another, but I'm talking about people who leave voicemails for the sake of leaving a voicemail.
For instance, I was called today by someone who needed me to fix something for them. He talked to someone in our Tier 1 group who IM'd me to say he was calling. I acknowledged said call and said I'll call him back. I knew his name, why he was calling, the ticket he was referencing, and I had his number. If you add that up, you'll find every piece of info anyone could possibly leave in a voicemail other than a convenient time to call back. He insisted on leaving a voicemail, which cost him a minute or so, and cost me a minute or so to retrieve it (as well as the time it took to write this angry blog about it).
His voicemail consisted of no new information.No times. No alternate callback numbers. No other people to contact in case he was out. Nothing. That list I gave above? That's what he left.
I have had people leave me a voicemail only to say they sent me an email. I had already read the email, and didn't need the voicemail. I am not sure that people are aware that it take time to check voicemail. It actually takes longer to check a voicemail than pretty much every other form of message-leaving communication. Text is quick. You can check that in the info bar if you catch it coming in. Emails are quick. Voicemail is slow.
I'm tired of pointless voicemails. Can you tell?
For instance, I was called today by someone who needed me to fix something for them. He talked to someone in our Tier 1 group who IM'd me to say he was calling. I acknowledged said call and said I'll call him back. I knew his name, why he was calling, the ticket he was referencing, and I had his number. If you add that up, you'll find every piece of info anyone could possibly leave in a voicemail other than a convenient time to call back. He insisted on leaving a voicemail, which cost him a minute or so, and cost me a minute or so to retrieve it (as well as the time it took to write this angry blog about it).
His voicemail consisted of no new information.No times. No alternate callback numbers. No other people to contact in case he was out. Nothing. That list I gave above? That's what he left.
I have had people leave me a voicemail only to say they sent me an email. I had already read the email, and didn't need the voicemail. I am not sure that people are aware that it take time to check voicemail. It actually takes longer to check a voicemail than pretty much every other form of message-leaving communication. Text is quick. You can check that in the info bar if you catch it coming in. Emails are quick. Voicemail is slow.
I'm tired of pointless voicemails. Can you tell?
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
The Game of Reply All
I'd like to introduce you to a game you may or may not have seen before. This game is called "Reply All." It's great fun to watch this play out as a spectator because you never want to be a participant in this game. If you're a participant in this game, you have failed. There are no winners. Well, the spectators are the winners if you really enjoy the head-shaking idiocy of the whole thing. Here's how this game works.
First, you have to be in a company or mailing list that has literally hundreds of people. Only with that kind of pool will you have enough players to make the game worth watching. If it's just your aunt and 3rd cousin, it won't last long.
The way the game starts is by someone accidentally sending a message to the wrong mailing list; this is probably the mailing list you were on, and you weren't supposed to get it either. If you're a level-headed individual who gets lots of emails, you'll look at this message, shrug, and then move on. If you're a player of "Replay All," then the game is on.
The volley starts by someone deciding they got this message in error, and the sender needs to know about it. Instead of clicking Reply, they decide to click Reply All to let that sender know. They put in a completely innocuous message such as, "Bob, I don't know what this is. Please remove me from this list." Sheep being what they are, this first message is followed by a barrage of "Me too" from at least a dozen other people.
It's time for the other side to get involved at this point because they've realized the game is on, but they don't realize that they need to stay out of it. The other side hits back with "Please do not Reply All." This might or might not have helpful instructions as to where to find the "Reply Only To Sender" button, or they could leave it at that.
Well, the "Me too" people already have a head start, and it takes awhile for that first "Don't do it" email to circulate, so that is followed by at least a half dozen more "Remove me from this list" or "Me too" emails.
Well, now management really wants a piece of this because they're getting outnumbered, so the next dozen "Me too" emails contain at least that many or more "Stop replying to all" peppered into them. At least one person by now will have changed the subject line to STOP REPLYING TO ALL (yes, in caps), but without a body text. The emails are flying fast and furious at this point with the "Me too" people desperately trying to out-email the "Stop replying to all" side as the game gets to the point that more than a hundred emails end up being sent clogging email boxes and exchange servers across the company.
Eventually, everyone has said their piece and it quiets down for a little bit. That is, until the crowd that only checks their email once a day comes in to find a zillion emails about something they have nothing to do with. They immediately (without a single glance at the subsequent string) reply all with the message "Please remove me from this list" before deleting the entire subseries of emails. The game resumes briefly with an angry "We already dealt with this. Stop replying to all" and a flurry of "Me too," but in the end, the game finally ends.
The last time this game happened, I kept every email and counted up the replies at the end, sorting them by the "remove me"s and the "stop replying to all"s along with a smattering of actual, subject-related emails that normally get lost with at least one being "Please disregard. Sent to the wrong list. Sorry." somewhere near the beginning of the game. That time, the distribution was about 50/50 between the sides.
I was reminded of this game this morning when there was an email for nominations for something or another, and someone replied all saying, "Not sure what I'm getting these. Please stop sending me these emails!" Oh, yes, he used that exclamation point! Because, why not? I got all excited hoping the game was afoot. Alas, no game this morning.
Next time the Replay All game starts in your office, don't be a player. Be a spectator and laugh at the simple-mindedness of your colleagues. Nothing shows character like a good game of "Reply All."
First, you have to be in a company or mailing list that has literally hundreds of people. Only with that kind of pool will you have enough players to make the game worth watching. If it's just your aunt and 3rd cousin, it won't last long.
The way the game starts is by someone accidentally sending a message to the wrong mailing list; this is probably the mailing list you were on, and you weren't supposed to get it either. If you're a level-headed individual who gets lots of emails, you'll look at this message, shrug, and then move on. If you're a player of "Replay All," then the game is on.
The volley starts by someone deciding they got this message in error, and the sender needs to know about it. Instead of clicking Reply, they decide to click Reply All to let that sender know. They put in a completely innocuous message such as, "Bob, I don't know what this is. Please remove me from this list." Sheep being what they are, this first message is followed by a barrage of "Me too" from at least a dozen other people.
It's time for the other side to get involved at this point because they've realized the game is on, but they don't realize that they need to stay out of it. The other side hits back with "Please do not Reply All." This might or might not have helpful instructions as to where to find the "Reply Only To Sender" button, or they could leave it at that.
Well, the "Me too" people already have a head start, and it takes awhile for that first "Don't do it" email to circulate, so that is followed by at least a half dozen more "Remove me from this list" or "Me too" emails.
Well, now management really wants a piece of this because they're getting outnumbered, so the next dozen "Me too" emails contain at least that many or more "Stop replying to all" peppered into them. At least one person by now will have changed the subject line to STOP REPLYING TO ALL (yes, in caps), but without a body text. The emails are flying fast and furious at this point with the "Me too" people desperately trying to out-email the "Stop replying to all" side as the game gets to the point that more than a hundred emails end up being sent clogging email boxes and exchange servers across the company.
Eventually, everyone has said their piece and it quiets down for a little bit. That is, until the crowd that only checks their email once a day comes in to find a zillion emails about something they have nothing to do with. They immediately (without a single glance at the subsequent string) reply all with the message "Please remove me from this list" before deleting the entire subseries of emails. The game resumes briefly with an angry "We already dealt with this. Stop replying to all" and a flurry of "Me too," but in the end, the game finally ends.
The last time this game happened, I kept every email and counted up the replies at the end, sorting them by the "remove me"s and the "stop replying to all"s along with a smattering of actual, subject-related emails that normally get lost with at least one being "Please disregard. Sent to the wrong list. Sorry." somewhere near the beginning of the game. That time, the distribution was about 50/50 between the sides.
I was reminded of this game this morning when there was an email for nominations for something or another, and someone replied all saying, "Not sure what I'm getting these. Please stop sending me these emails!" Oh, yes, he used that exclamation point! Because, why not? I got all excited hoping the game was afoot. Alas, no game this morning.
Next time the Replay All game starts in your office, don't be a player. Be a spectator and laugh at the simple-mindedness of your colleagues. Nothing shows character like a good game of "Reply All."
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Being Wrong Is Fine
Without being deliberately boastful, I can tell you that I'm a pretty smart fellow. I have a lot of knowledge about a lot of stuff, and I actively use what I know to fill in gaps that make logical sense to me. This knowledge depth and my command of how to deliver it impresses a lot of people, and some of them think I'm a master of everything and know everything. I never claim to know everything, and I acknowledge that I'm wrong sometimes about my logical deductions regarding the gaps in my knowledge. I'm always interested in correcting whatever it is I don't know with actual facts so that I can be correct. I have no qualms over changing my mind.
Thing is, when people that I deal with learn that I don't know something or I get something wrong, it suddenly becomes a monumental event. They're all "we need to mark this down as the day you don't know something." It's like the incident, if you want to call it an incident, means more to them than to me. Really, being wrong isn't an issue.
I think the reason I complain sometimes about people being "stupid" has little to do with their level of knowledge. Most of the people I shake my head over are generally unwilling to learn what they did wrong so they always make me do it, or they are so stubborn, they refuse to change their ways or knowledge and cannot comprehend that what I'm telling them is true. Any contradiction to what they believe is considered to be wrong, and they want another answer. "That doesn't make sense" is an extremely common phrase, and even when I explain how I know it to be true, they cannot get past their prior knowledge to accept it.
On this, Doctor Who has a lot of good stuff in it, and occasionally, you get such a gem that it's worth keeping around. In the Satan Pit when confronted with the idea that they are dealing with something like Satan who could have existed prior to the universe, the Doctor came back with this one:
"I... believe. I believe I haven't seen everything, I don't know. It's funny, isn't it? The things you make up—the rules. If that thing had said it came from beyond the universe I'd believe it, but before the universe... that's impossible. It doesn't fit in my rules. Still, that's why I keep travelling. To be proved wrong."
I love that. Consider the implications of that. A thousand year old time traveler knows just about everything about everything, but looks forward to a time when he can be proven wrong. Why? Because that's learning. Never stop learning. Always be open to the possibility that there is something that can show you something that shakes your beliefs - your personal set of rules. Anytime someone tells me I am wrong about something, I always ask them to explain. This is not to confront them or challenge them, but I honestly want to know their facts and weigh them against my own. I am always open to being wrong if someone can show me how.
This goes right with what we learn from Mythbusters: Failure is always an option. Consider that. Humanity generally hates failure, but when it comes to failure versus success, you get something from each avenue. Yes, from a psychological perspective, we prefer successes and would rather remember them, but failure at least shows us how not to do something. Granted, failure to successfully land a plane might not give you a second chance, but in most cases, we can use the failure data to move forward.
The people I spoke of earlier? They cannot be proved wrong. They can't accept it. They also don't know how to deal with failure. Failure to them is a catastrophe where to me, it just means I have to change something and try again.
The people around me who seem to bask in the glow of my genius (I'm seriously not making this up) can mark all they want in their calendars, but for me, it's just another learning experience. I am to the point where I just embrace it for all it's worth.
Never stop learning. Every day can teach something new. Always keep that brain busy.
Thing is, when people that I deal with learn that I don't know something or I get something wrong, it suddenly becomes a monumental event. They're all "we need to mark this down as the day you don't know something." It's like the incident, if you want to call it an incident, means more to them than to me. Really, being wrong isn't an issue.
I think the reason I complain sometimes about people being "stupid" has little to do with their level of knowledge. Most of the people I shake my head over are generally unwilling to learn what they did wrong so they always make me do it, or they are so stubborn, they refuse to change their ways or knowledge and cannot comprehend that what I'm telling them is true. Any contradiction to what they believe is considered to be wrong, and they want another answer. "That doesn't make sense" is an extremely common phrase, and even when I explain how I know it to be true, they cannot get past their prior knowledge to accept it.
"I... believe. I believe I haven't seen everything, I don't know. It's funny, isn't it? The things you make up—the rules. If that thing had said it came from beyond the universe I'd believe it, but before the universe... that's impossible. It doesn't fit in my rules. Still, that's why I keep travelling. To be proved wrong."
I love that. Consider the implications of that. A thousand year old time traveler knows just about everything about everything, but looks forward to a time when he can be proven wrong. Why? Because that's learning. Never stop learning. Always be open to the possibility that there is something that can show you something that shakes your beliefs - your personal set of rules. Anytime someone tells me I am wrong about something, I always ask them to explain. This is not to confront them or challenge them, but I honestly want to know their facts and weigh them against my own. I am always open to being wrong if someone can show me how.
This goes right with what we learn from Mythbusters: Failure is always an option. Consider that. Humanity generally hates failure, but when it comes to failure versus success, you get something from each avenue. Yes, from a psychological perspective, we prefer successes and would rather remember them, but failure at least shows us how not to do something. Granted, failure to successfully land a plane might not give you a second chance, but in most cases, we can use the failure data to move forward.
The people I spoke of earlier? They cannot be proved wrong. They can't accept it. They also don't know how to deal with failure. Failure to them is a catastrophe where to me, it just means I have to change something and try again.
The people around me who seem to bask in the glow of my genius (I'm seriously not making this up) can mark all they want in their calendars, but for me, it's just another learning experience. I am to the point where I just embrace it for all it's worth.
Never stop learning. Every day can teach something new. Always keep that brain busy.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Women's Dress Code
At work, we have a basic dress code on Monday thru Thursday which is known as "business casual." This is actually a fairly common dress code across the business world which means, in a nutshell, "don't wear jeans." Why? I really haven't figured that out, to be honest. I think, to an extent, the idea is that if you dress nice, you feel better, and you work harder. I believe this is somewhat akin to the reason the Spirit Committee exists.
That being beside the point, when you look at what people actually wear for this dress code, you might notice a bit of a gulf between the sexes. If you look at the male side of the coin, you see shirts and trousers. That's it. Sure, there is some variation on the types of shirts, but they all have collars (it's in the rules: shirts with collars) and sleeves (whether they be short or long), and the trousers are all about the same except for color. Shoes are pretty similar as well, though some of us toe the line and wear sneakers instead of dress shoes (yeah, way to stick it to the man!), but the shoes cover the entire foot front to back. With men's clothing, you see the head, the arms (sometimes), and hands. Nothing else.
Women on the other represent exactly how much you can get away with in a dress code. Everything is optional. Sleeves? Optional. Collar? Optional. Toed shoes? Optional. Trousers? Optional. Few, if any, dress with the level of coverage that men do. Don't hit with with "proper" dress, because what I'm speaking of is real life, not concept. These are things I've seen.
What inspired this writing was when I went to the break room and saw a woman in there wearing capri pants (but not made of denim) and a sleeveless (but not strappy) shirt with the converse style shoe and no socks. She might as well have been going to the beach. Most of the shoes I see women wear are slip on, so bare feet are a common sight around desks, and when they wear skirts, they rarely wear stockings, so you get an eyeful of leg as well.
Exactly what is the difference between skirts and shorts? Someone enlighten me. I mean from a purely scientific, fundamental perspective. They both involve coverage only down to about mid thigh, but it seems that skirts are fine for dressy stuff where shorts, despite the fact that they provide more coverage and come in formal styles and fabrics, seem to be inappropriate. It's my opinion that if skirts are allowable, shorts should be allowed as well. Yet, social stigmas prevent it. Anyway.
Moving to the upper half, the shirt (oh, I'm sorry; blouse) side of things is just as varied. Most women's shirts are cut fairly low so you get at least the upper portion of their chest if not a little cleavage. If I wore a shirt like that, I'd be sent home (and probably asked to shave). In men's shirts, you don't button the top button without a tie, and the only time you leave three buttons undone is on disco night, but that's about where most women's shirts seem to end is about three buttons down.
I know this comes off as a rant, but it seems that even though women have pushed for equal rights in all things, the clothing is a wide gulf of inequality. I want to wear the male equivalents of what women are wearing. That would mean shorts and a range of shirts without collars (I have some that are not t-shirts and don't have collars). I just think if we want true equality in the workplace, we need this change, or women have to wear trousers and collared shirts every day like we do.
That's not unfair. That's what they asked for a hundred years ago.
That being beside the point, when you look at what people actually wear for this dress code, you might notice a bit of a gulf between the sexes. If you look at the male side of the coin, you see shirts and trousers. That's it. Sure, there is some variation on the types of shirts, but they all have collars (it's in the rules: shirts with collars) and sleeves (whether they be short or long), and the trousers are all about the same except for color. Shoes are pretty similar as well, though some of us toe the line and wear sneakers instead of dress shoes (yeah, way to stick it to the man!), but the shoes cover the entire foot front to back. With men's clothing, you see the head, the arms (sometimes), and hands. Nothing else.
Women on the other represent exactly how much you can get away with in a dress code. Everything is optional. Sleeves? Optional. Collar? Optional. Toed shoes? Optional. Trousers? Optional. Few, if any, dress with the level of coverage that men do. Don't hit with with "proper" dress, because what I'm speaking of is real life, not concept. These are things I've seen.
What inspired this writing was when I went to the break room and saw a woman in there wearing capri pants (but not made of denim) and a sleeveless (but not strappy) shirt with the converse style shoe and no socks. She might as well have been going to the beach. Most of the shoes I see women wear are slip on, so bare feet are a common sight around desks, and when they wear skirts, they rarely wear stockings, so you get an eyeful of leg as well.
Exactly what is the difference between skirts and shorts? Someone enlighten me. I mean from a purely scientific, fundamental perspective. They both involve coverage only down to about mid thigh, but it seems that skirts are fine for dressy stuff where shorts, despite the fact that they provide more coverage and come in formal styles and fabrics, seem to be inappropriate. It's my opinion that if skirts are allowable, shorts should be allowed as well. Yet, social stigmas prevent it. Anyway.
Moving to the upper half, the shirt (oh, I'm sorry; blouse) side of things is just as varied. Most women's shirts are cut fairly low so you get at least the upper portion of their chest if not a little cleavage. If I wore a shirt like that, I'd be sent home (and probably asked to shave). In men's shirts, you don't button the top button without a tie, and the only time you leave three buttons undone is on disco night, but that's about where most women's shirts seem to end is about three buttons down.
I know this comes off as a rant, but it seems that even though women have pushed for equal rights in all things, the clothing is a wide gulf of inequality. I want to wear the male equivalents of what women are wearing. That would mean shorts and a range of shirts without collars (I have some that are not t-shirts and don't have collars). I just think if we want true equality in the workplace, we need this change, or women have to wear trousers and collared shirts every day like we do.
That's not unfair. That's what they asked for a hundred years ago.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Conference Calls
The business world today is a wonderful flurry of communication. We have so many ways to stay in touch that some people of lesser minds are terribly and easily confused by how many ways we have available. But what is the best way? How can we get things done? How can we bring everyone together? Let me tell you the most pointless, and yet the most popular, in my own humble opinion.
Conference calls.
I hate conference calls. Most of the time when I am invited to a conference calls, it is because of my specialized knowledge. Someone has questions they want answered, and they want everyone on the line to both hear the answers and ask any follow-up questions they may have. To you, this may seem like a good idea, and writing it out, it even rings of sound reasoning. Here's where it goes wrong.
First, when I'm invited to "discuss" this, they never tell me anything about it ahead of time. I'm always invited via email with the title of "Discuss the Meaning of Life" or whatever the topic is. You can't just ship back 42, and be done with it though because they have to "discuss it." What I always wish they'd at least do is send me the questions they have, so I could be prepared, but I'll tell you why they don't do this (anymore). Someone sent me a list of questions they wished to "discuss" on a conference call once. I immediately shot back detailed answers to every one of their questions, and suddenly, we didn't need the conference call. The answers I gave were well worded, and well-researched which is how you respond to an email.
Have you guessed my preferred method? It's email. Here is how email is superior to a conference call. It goes to everyone on the call to read and reply at their convenience. The answers can be detailed and supported with information. They are immediately referenceable, if needed. Anyone can reply with follow-up questions that can also be read and replied to at the convenience of those involved. No one has to make sure they are sitting on the phone at a specific time. No one has to be there "just in case" and end up not participating (as is often the case when I am on one). There have been several calls where I've been called up only to not be needed after all when the issue is nailed down. They just never talked about it in enough detail before the call. Seriously.
A conference call is always chaos. They save up their best questions without revealing any of them ahead of time to watch me squirm. I don't like squirming. They also love blind-siding me with questions about stuff I never expected, and it always takes me some time to look up whatever it is they need to know. It wastes a ton of time for everyone waiting for the answer. They sometimes pepper multiple questions all at once, and I have to ask them to back it up and only shoot one at a time, and sometimes one question leads to another, so they start talking out of turn. One person is inevitably the moderator, and for some reason talks loudly, or yells, the entire time to try to establish that they are in charge of the call. I don't get that.
And email full of questions can take me sometimes up to thirty minutes to wade through, write everything out in a reasonable and easy to understand fashion. A conference call of the same questions will take an hour or more and no one will remember anything from it. Get that? They'll get the gist of it, but most of the time, the takeaway for everyone is that it is begin taken care of. They just needed that reassurance. Now that it is begin taken care of, I have to remember what the heck they asked that I was supposed to take care of.
Emails should be our first line of questioning, especially if there are detailed or in depth questions. They should never be saved for the conference call to be machine gunned all at once. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens. Every time. Which is why I hate conference calls.
Conference calls.
I hate conference calls. Most of the time when I am invited to a conference calls, it is because of my specialized knowledge. Someone has questions they want answered, and they want everyone on the line to both hear the answers and ask any follow-up questions they may have. To you, this may seem like a good idea, and writing it out, it even rings of sound reasoning. Here's where it goes wrong.
First, when I'm invited to "discuss" this, they never tell me anything about it ahead of time. I'm always invited via email with the title of "Discuss the Meaning of Life" or whatever the topic is. You can't just ship back 42, and be done with it though because they have to "discuss it." What I always wish they'd at least do is send me the questions they have, so I could be prepared, but I'll tell you why they don't do this (anymore). Someone sent me a list of questions they wished to "discuss" on a conference call once. I immediately shot back detailed answers to every one of their questions, and suddenly, we didn't need the conference call. The answers I gave were well worded, and well-researched which is how you respond to an email.
Have you guessed my preferred method? It's email. Here is how email is superior to a conference call. It goes to everyone on the call to read and reply at their convenience. The answers can be detailed and supported with information. They are immediately referenceable, if needed. Anyone can reply with follow-up questions that can also be read and replied to at the convenience of those involved. No one has to make sure they are sitting on the phone at a specific time. No one has to be there "just in case" and end up not participating (as is often the case when I am on one). There have been several calls where I've been called up only to not be needed after all when the issue is nailed down. They just never talked about it in enough detail before the call. Seriously.
A conference call is always chaos. They save up their best questions without revealing any of them ahead of time to watch me squirm. I don't like squirming. They also love blind-siding me with questions about stuff I never expected, and it always takes me some time to look up whatever it is they need to know. It wastes a ton of time for everyone waiting for the answer. They sometimes pepper multiple questions all at once, and I have to ask them to back it up and only shoot one at a time, and sometimes one question leads to another, so they start talking out of turn. One person is inevitably the moderator, and for some reason talks loudly, or yells, the entire time to try to establish that they are in charge of the call. I don't get that.
And email full of questions can take me sometimes up to thirty minutes to wade through, write everything out in a reasonable and easy to understand fashion. A conference call of the same questions will take an hour or more and no one will remember anything from it. Get that? They'll get the gist of it, but most of the time, the takeaway for everyone is that it is begin taken care of. They just needed that reassurance. Now that it is begin taken care of, I have to remember what the heck they asked that I was supposed to take care of.
Emails should be our first line of questioning, especially if there are detailed or in depth questions. They should never be saved for the conference call to be machine gunned all at once. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens. Every time. Which is why I hate conference calls.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Spirit Committee
So at my workplace, we have a group of people called the Spirit Committee. They take time out of their normal jobs (showing management how disposable they are) to come up with and execute ideas to make the workplace more enjoyable and a "better and more fun place to work" for those that apparently need more than a paycheck to keep them coming back every day. I'd rather they just give me the money they spend on their programs, and I'll find something one my own, but I digress.
So periodically, I get a quarter sheet of card stock with a notice printed in brilliant color as to what the spirit committee sponsored activity it in any given month. They are the folks behind the massive failure of the costume contest I spoke of previously. As you can imagine, I don't have the greatest confidence in them, and I honestly find the whole thing to be a grand waste of money. Over the summer, they threw a "company picnic" where we all took a long lunch break to go to somewhere else in town to have some hot dogs and throw balls at managers in a dunk tank (as long as you paid for the privilege of doing so as it was also a fundraiser for something else). That was it. There were some arcade games there, but not much worth playing. The only thing to do was socialize, and the problems with that are a) I can talk to people anywhere and b) I am not much of a talker so socializing is not something I find particularly enjoyable. So I was mostly bored and trapped since they bussed us over. They took a picture of everyone "having fun" at this rather boring building, and I decided to give the camera my exact opinion of my time there. Nothing obscene. I just didn't smile... It was kind of a scowl. I don't play the corporate game well.
Oh, and get this. This activity was called the company picnic. I'd been to company picnics before, and they generally involved the families of the employees. Our last few years have not. They have been internal only, overlong lunch breaks. Now, last year was admittedly better where they took everyone to Incredible Pizza and gave us all a one hour play card to do whatever, but even then, it seemed a bit silly when you think about it. I'm the first to admit I'm a big kid at heart, but whose idea was it to take a bunch of adults to a kids' place?
Their current deal is a mini "golfathon" where they've encouraged departments across the building to build mini golf holes in their area so people can play through in this sort of tournament. How's this working out? I really can't say for sure, but apparently, one of the committee members is being "pressured" into having our area make a hole. Yeah, he used the term "pressured." I read two things into this. First, he doesn't want to do it, so it wasn't his idea, and he had originally decided to just play along quietly. Now, they aren't getting the participation they want, and the fat's on the fire, so they want all the committee members to "step up" and show the organization that they had a cool idea.
There have been several "cool ideas" that have fizzled due to low participation. The last potluck they had was canceled due to next to no one volunteering to bring anything. Apparently, I'm not the only one protesting against the nonsense.
I honestly don't care. I am there for my time to goof off on the Interne-... um, work my butt off and go home where I actually enjoy my time. I don't need some silly committee to waste my time in mandatory fun. I do have actual work to do, and I was given the time I have to do it. Even if I have some down time, I have other things I can be doing. I only have a few precious hours per day, and to have those taken more than they've already been taken is annoying.
I think when I was younger, I somewhat got into the company events finding them somewhat fun, but having been in the "workforce" for some time now, I find that I don't care anymore. There are other things I'd rather be doing to earn my keep in this world, and I'd rather spend my downtime working towards those ends. Do I enjoy programming? Sometimes. There are other aspects that aren't as enjoyable.
Still, in the end, I'm only at this job for the paycheck. They can leave me out of the "fun." I'll have it later.
So periodically, I get a quarter sheet of card stock with a notice printed in brilliant color as to what the spirit committee sponsored activity it in any given month. They are the folks behind the massive failure of the costume contest I spoke of previously. As you can imagine, I don't have the greatest confidence in them, and I honestly find the whole thing to be a grand waste of money. Over the summer, they threw a "company picnic" where we all took a long lunch break to go to somewhere else in town to have some hot dogs and throw balls at managers in a dunk tank (as long as you paid for the privilege of doing so as it was also a fundraiser for something else). That was it. There were some arcade games there, but not much worth playing. The only thing to do was socialize, and the problems with that are a) I can talk to people anywhere and b) I am not much of a talker so socializing is not something I find particularly enjoyable. So I was mostly bored and trapped since they bussed us over. They took a picture of everyone "having fun" at this rather boring building, and I decided to give the camera my exact opinion of my time there. Nothing obscene. I just didn't smile... It was kind of a scowl. I don't play the corporate game well.
Oh, and get this. This activity was called the company picnic. I'd been to company picnics before, and they generally involved the families of the employees. Our last few years have not. They have been internal only, overlong lunch breaks. Now, last year was admittedly better where they took everyone to Incredible Pizza and gave us all a one hour play card to do whatever, but even then, it seemed a bit silly when you think about it. I'm the first to admit I'm a big kid at heart, but whose idea was it to take a bunch of adults to a kids' place?
Their current deal is a mini "golfathon" where they've encouraged departments across the building to build mini golf holes in their area so people can play through in this sort of tournament. How's this working out? I really can't say for sure, but apparently, one of the committee members is being "pressured" into having our area make a hole. Yeah, he used the term "pressured." I read two things into this. First, he doesn't want to do it, so it wasn't his idea, and he had originally decided to just play along quietly. Now, they aren't getting the participation they want, and the fat's on the fire, so they want all the committee members to "step up" and show the organization that they had a cool idea.
There have been several "cool ideas" that have fizzled due to low participation. The last potluck they had was canceled due to next to no one volunteering to bring anything. Apparently, I'm not the only one protesting against the nonsense.
I honestly don't care. I am there for my time to goof off on the Interne-... um, work my butt off and go home where I actually enjoy my time. I don't need some silly committee to waste my time in mandatory fun. I do have actual work to do, and I was given the time I have to do it. Even if I have some down time, I have other things I can be doing. I only have a few precious hours per day, and to have those taken more than they've already been taken is annoying.
I think when I was younger, I somewhat got into the company events finding them somewhat fun, but having been in the "workforce" for some time now, I find that I don't care anymore. There are other things I'd rather be doing to earn my keep in this world, and I'd rather spend my downtime working towards those ends. Do I enjoy programming? Sometimes. There are other aspects that aren't as enjoyable.
Still, in the end, I'm only at this job for the paycheck. They can leave me out of the "fun." I'll have it later.
Friday, September 13, 2013
Just Really Dim
You know, sometimes, I feel like I go on a rant about people, but in my defense, this is my blog, and I'm in charge here, so there. Honestly, there is no better way to get something off your chest than to communicate about it in some way, so this amounts to therapy...in a way.
What I'm on about (this time) is the sheer bewilderment on y part about how some people manage to survive in our modern world. Yes, my job at present is one that is a little specialized, but what throws me for a loop is when people cannot handle or comprehend what should the simplest of concepts (relative to what they do). I'm not talking about the finite principles of writing a program or even working some of the finer intricacies of Windows (like the fact that right-clicking anything anywhere pulls up a relevant context menu ... someone's mind was just blown).
I give you two real world examples for what I'm walking about. First, logins and passwords. Everyone has a login for everything they do. Have email? You have a login. Have voicemail? You have a login. Have internet access? You have a login. With every login comes a password. Now, a quiz for you. What does a password do? Anyone? If you said, it keeps the login secure, you would be correct. If you said it controls the level of access for the user, I would look at you funny. Yet, on a very regular basis, I get asked this question. A lot.
You see, one of my specialties is making sure that our product that navigates Medicare's DDE system continues to successfully navigate said system. Part of my job is interpreting error messages. Very, very few of those messages actually relate to a bad password. Yet, it seems people ask with every other error they get if it is a password problem. One question: did it log in? If the answer is yes, then it is not a password problem. Real simple. I can't fathom where anyone would get the idea that a problem accessing certain data would be a problem with the password. Now, it's almost certainly a problem with the login and its individual setup with rights and such, but the password? Eh, never.
Honestly, who would be actively using a program, get an access denied error, and think, I must have a problem with my password? And on a pause, I have to admit probably a large number of people. *shakes head in dismay*
The other one has to do with people and the Internet. The first time I got onto the Internet was in 1994, I think. I was a late bloomer, I know. Don't hold it against me. There is one thing I've known about the Internet from the very beginning. It isn't on my computer. I have a program that I use to navigate through the world wide web, but none of the content is actually on my machine. This was back in the days where looking at pictures was almost out of the question. You wanted information, you got a text based page of info. If you wanted pics, you just run and grab and sandwich while that 350Kb pic downloads through your blazing 14400 bps modem. This is almost twenty years ago.
Yet, only a few days ago, I was speaking to someone and told her to go to a website we use for remote access. She said, "Oh, is that on the internet? I'm not sure it's installed on this computer." This is where I close my eyes and realign my chi with the universe in the hopes I don't say something to insult the questionable intelligence I've just encountered. After all, I'm not deal with a patient in a nursing home here. This is someone who works with computers (granted not in a technical capacity, but she has a job using them) every day. Here's a fun fact about Windows. If you have Windows installed on your computer, you have an Internet browser. It's integrated into the operating system. And if that computer can't access the Internet, there are a lot of things it shouldn't be doing right now that I understand it is.
Wow. Just ... wow.
What I'm on about (this time) is the sheer bewilderment on y part about how some people manage to survive in our modern world. Yes, my job at present is one that is a little specialized, but what throws me for a loop is when people cannot handle or comprehend what should the simplest of concepts (relative to what they do). I'm not talking about the finite principles of writing a program or even working some of the finer intricacies of Windows (like the fact that right-clicking anything anywhere pulls up a relevant context menu ... someone's mind was just blown).
I give you two real world examples for what I'm walking about. First, logins and passwords. Everyone has a login for everything they do. Have email? You have a login. Have voicemail? You have a login. Have internet access? You have a login. With every login comes a password. Now, a quiz for you. What does a password do? Anyone? If you said, it keeps the login secure, you would be correct. If you said it controls the level of access for the user, I would look at you funny. Yet, on a very regular basis, I get asked this question. A lot.
You see, one of my specialties is making sure that our product that navigates Medicare's DDE system continues to successfully navigate said system. Part of my job is interpreting error messages. Very, very few of those messages actually relate to a bad password. Yet, it seems people ask with every other error they get if it is a password problem. One question: did it log in? If the answer is yes, then it is not a password problem. Real simple. I can't fathom where anyone would get the idea that a problem accessing certain data would be a problem with the password. Now, it's almost certainly a problem with the login and its individual setup with rights and such, but the password? Eh, never.
Honestly, who would be actively using a program, get an access denied error, and think, I must have a problem with my password? And on a pause, I have to admit probably a large number of people. *shakes head in dismay*
The other one has to do with people and the Internet. The first time I got onto the Internet was in 1994, I think. I was a late bloomer, I know. Don't hold it against me. There is one thing I've known about the Internet from the very beginning. It isn't on my computer. I have a program that I use to navigate through the world wide web, but none of the content is actually on my machine. This was back in the days where looking at pictures was almost out of the question. You wanted information, you got a text based page of info. If you wanted pics, you just run and grab and sandwich while that 350Kb pic downloads through your blazing 14400 bps modem. This is almost twenty years ago.
Yet, only a few days ago, I was speaking to someone and told her to go to a website we use for remote access. She said, "Oh, is that on the internet? I'm not sure it's installed on this computer." This is where I close my eyes and realign my chi with the universe in the hopes I don't say something to insult the questionable intelligence I've just encountered. After all, I'm not deal with a patient in a nursing home here. This is someone who works with computers (granted not in a technical capacity, but she has a job using them) every day. Here's a fun fact about Windows. If you have Windows installed on your computer, you have an Internet browser. It's integrated into the operating system. And if that computer can't access the Internet, there are a lot of things it shouldn't be doing right now that I understand it is.
Wow. Just ... wow.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Taking Turns at the Garage
Remember back in school when you had to wait in a long line of kids to get anything done? You know that even after growing up, you still have to do that, right? Yet, there are a lot of people who are extremely impatient, and even believe that they don't need to wait in line. Maybe they're actually too important to wait in line and should be able to skip it. Some amusement parks even have VIP lines where those with the cash can get a special card to skip the long lines for the working stiffs.
The parking garage where I work has two gates that are side by side. You pull up, put your card in front of the scanner, and it opens the gate. My general impression of the system is that the right gate is to go up the ramp and the left gate is to turn left once you get in to the down the ramp into the basement area. This second gate would also be used for load balancing the entry point so if you have a lot of cars, both gates can be going simultaneously so that there isn't a line backing up to the main road. However, at the time when I arrive, there is no need for load balancing because there's no line.
But inevitably, when I am on the ramp side, someone pulls into the basement side, their window down and hand hanging out with their access card in hand. Their impression is that this weirdo in the ramp lane will not be as fast as they are and they can get the jump on me to get up that ramp first ... at 5 mph. Obviously, because I was there before they arrived, my gate opens first and in I go, and they try to whip in first and fail, ending up "stuck" behind me. Oh darn. Maybe he's afraid I'll take "his" space.
To be fair, there have been quite a few times, the parking garage tailgater was a woman. I wouldn't want to discriminate and say men are the only sex that is completely selfish while driving, would I? Everyone is equally capable of being a jerk to their fellow human on the road and in the parking garage.
Seriously, though, this is a parking garage. It's not a race to see who can get in first, yet some people think that life is a big race. Just this morning, I was cruising along the highway to get to work (at or about the posted speed limit), and I saw a truck who had just entered suddenly nail the gas to pass me to settle in front of me (instead of taking the quite ample amount of space behind me in the same lane). That car length was important, just like that one car length to get up in the parking garage. I've had people go so far as to pass me on a two-laned road to get that one car length only to take the next turn into a gas station. The one car length could not have been that beneficial to their time.
I can only imagine that these people have stress lines on their foreheads, and lead a generally very angry and migraine-filled life, and they cannot figure out why they're so stressed and tired all the time. Easy solution to the problem. Drive like I drive (because I am a human archetype, of course).
I approach driving with a two fold understanding of the process. First, I cannot control anyone else on the road. They're going to go as fast or as slow as they go, and no matter what I do, I won't be able to get to my destination any faster than those other people can get there. Therefore, I chill out and drive behind them at whatever speed they happen to go. Now, if they go 25 in a 50, I'll likely get around them, but I usually just set the cruise for the speed limit, chill out, and let it ride while listening to the radio. It's nice. Second, everybody is trying to kill me. I don't trust anyone on the road, and I watch them all constantly. Setting that cruise frees up my mind to watch the rest of them with my foot hovering over the brake just waiting for someone to get out of line.
I've only had one accident since 1997, and that was because I was late for work, and not paying attention while trying to get there faster than (let's face it) I actually could get there. It wasn't my fault because the guy ran into me, but if I'd followed my own rules, it would not have happened.
The parking garage where I work has two gates that are side by side. You pull up, put your card in front of the scanner, and it opens the gate. My general impression of the system is that the right gate is to go up the ramp and the left gate is to turn left once you get in to the down the ramp into the basement area. This second gate would also be used for load balancing the entry point so if you have a lot of cars, both gates can be going simultaneously so that there isn't a line backing up to the main road. However, at the time when I arrive, there is no need for load balancing because there's no line.
But inevitably, when I am on the ramp side, someone pulls into the basement side, their window down and hand hanging out with their access card in hand. Their impression is that this weirdo in the ramp lane will not be as fast as they are and they can get the jump on me to get up that ramp first ... at 5 mph. Obviously, because I was there before they arrived, my gate opens first and in I go, and they try to whip in first and fail, ending up "stuck" behind me. Oh darn. Maybe he's afraid I'll take "his" space.
To be fair, there have been quite a few times, the parking garage tailgater was a woman. I wouldn't want to discriminate and say men are the only sex that is completely selfish while driving, would I? Everyone is equally capable of being a jerk to their fellow human on the road and in the parking garage.
Seriously, though, this is a parking garage. It's not a race to see who can get in first, yet some people think that life is a big race. Just this morning, I was cruising along the highway to get to work (at or about the posted speed limit), and I saw a truck who had just entered suddenly nail the gas to pass me to settle in front of me (instead of taking the quite ample amount of space behind me in the same lane). That car length was important, just like that one car length to get up in the parking garage. I've had people go so far as to pass me on a two-laned road to get that one car length only to take the next turn into a gas station. The one car length could not have been that beneficial to their time.
I can only imagine that these people have stress lines on their foreheads, and lead a generally very angry and migraine-filled life, and they cannot figure out why they're so stressed and tired all the time. Easy solution to the problem. Drive like I drive (because I am a human archetype, of course).
I approach driving with a two fold understanding of the process. First, I cannot control anyone else on the road. They're going to go as fast or as slow as they go, and no matter what I do, I won't be able to get to my destination any faster than those other people can get there. Therefore, I chill out and drive behind them at whatever speed they happen to go. Now, if they go 25 in a 50, I'll likely get around them, but I usually just set the cruise for the speed limit, chill out, and let it ride while listening to the radio. It's nice. Second, everybody is trying to kill me. I don't trust anyone on the road, and I watch them all constantly. Setting that cruise frees up my mind to watch the rest of them with my foot hovering over the brake just waiting for someone to get out of line.
I've only had one accident since 1997, and that was because I was late for work, and not paying attention while trying to get there faster than (let's face it) I actually could get there. It wasn't my fault because the guy ran into me, but if I'd followed my own rules, it would not have happened.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
