• konee (unregistered) in reply to Chelloveck
    Chelloveck:
    Something very similar actually happened to me at one of my previous jobs. It's a "previous" job because the outcome was not as happy as in this story. By the time the reading comprehension mistake was pointed out, the high muck-a-mucks were already heavily invested in their own interpretation and wouldn't back down.

    I lost a pretty nice gig there. Fortunately, I ended up relocating to an even better job in a better state and have been altogether happier here!

    It's even worse when the bitch makes it up completely - and the high muck-a-mucks were already heavily invested in their own interpretation and wouldn't back down - happened to me.

  • db (unregistered) in reply to Matt
    Matt:
    ... we'd all be living in some post apocalyptic Mad Max world by 2000. What ever happened to that?

    They were out by a year and had the wrong reasons for it happening.

  • Georgem (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    how I love management:
    Georgem:
    I'm off to write a genetic algorithm to work out exactly what phrases I can use to subliminally insult senior managers in emails
    Post them here once you've found them, we could all use them somedays.
    I believe what you really meant to say was:

    Plz send me teh algorithmz.

    I hav one doubt regarding "violence against women" concept at real time

  • (cs) in reply to Chelloveck
    Chelloveck:
    Something very similar actually happened to me at one of my previous jobs.
    Story, please!
  • (cs) in reply to Jake Clarson
    Jake Clarson:
    Like trying to put too much luggage in a suitcase that's simply to small, and when there is absolutely no reason to not get yourself a somewhat larger suitcase.
    Yeah, it's usually best to put the luggage in the trunk. Suitcases are more suited to suits (heh, heh).
  • (cs)

    haha, my subtle comments started a global warming war. Excellent.

    To note, I'm not a global warming/climate change denier. Global warming is occurring, that is easily verified fact. Global warming causes climate change, that is basic meteorology.

    However I would say I'm an Al Gore skeptic. As I said before, the majority of what he proposed is not science, it's conjecture based on wobbly assumptions. He frequently confuses causation with correlation.

    Long story short, do I expect to see some consequences from our rampant over use of fossil fuels (and non-renewable resources in general)? Yes absolutely, you would be a fool to think there wouldn't be any downside.

    Do I expect the ocean to rise by 100 feet and human kind to be an endangered species in the next 100 years? No absolutely not, you would also have to be a fool to believe that, or at least to believe that true science is predicting that.

    Do I believe we need to (dramatically) cut back on our uses for fossil fuels? Yes absolutely. Both due to climate change and due to the fact that we're going to run out of oil before I'm likely to retire (I'm mid 20s).

    As an aside, I really like the xkcd related to this.

  • (cs) in reply to hatterson
    hatterson:
    ...

    Just FYI i've never watched/listened to anything Al Gore has said related to Global Warming, but I'm pretty sure you're mischaracterizing his statements.

    "100 feet in the next 100 years"? maybe on a projection they admittedly tweaked for "worst case scenario" and told everyone they tweaked for "worst case scenario"

    however you don't have to have that much of a rise to inundate most of Florida (average above sea level height is like... 8 feet)

    But I see from most of you're post that you're a loooot less WWHHHAAAGARBL than your first post suggested (with the "anticapitalist/prostatist" comment)

  • Krunch (unregistered)

    This reminds me of one of my first escalations. I work in support and after finding the problem, I had to escalate using a template that contains a section that reads "Action requested". I filled it as such:

    Review attached coredump and patch (which fix customer's problem) then make sure the next release [...] does contain that patch (which is already applied to unreleased versions). Also possibly chastise people who move NULL checks around without thinking as well as develop a test case that would trigger the bug in order to include it in future QA checks.

    I never got any problem with this kind of wording. The developer who moved the NULL check even apologized publicly :) Just never give any name directly.

  • Bob Tables (unregistered) in reply to Eric Rehmeyer

    There was no violence. Management fails at reading, therefore thinking there where intensions of violence.

    Again, there was no violence, funny or otherwise.

  • (cs) in reply to Kazan
    Kazan:
    hatterson:
    ...

    Just FYI i've never watched/listened to anything Al Gore has said related to Global Warming, but I'm pretty sure you're mischaracterizing his statements.

    "100 feet in the next 100 years"? maybe on a projection they admittedly tweaked for "worst case scenario" and told everyone they tweaked for "worst case scenario"

    however you don't have to have that much of a rise to inundate most of Florida (average above sea level height is like... 8 feet)

    But I see from most of you're post that you're a loooot less WWHHHAAAGARBL than your first post suggested (with the "anticapitalist/prostatist" comment)

    I've watched his video, but admittedly wasn't really paying attention after the first 10 or 15 minutes as I had already gotten tired of it. Either way it's more built around scaring people into reacting than actual science, which is where I take my main issue.

    And yes the 100 feet thing was an exaggeration, however I have heard things along the lines of 30-50 feet as a 'worst case'. Although the same people also said 5-7 feet was an absolute minimum, which caused me to laugh.

  • (cs) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Jake Clarson:
    Like trying to put too much luggage in a suitcase that's simply to small, and when there is absolutely no reason to not get yourself a somewhat larger suitcase.
    Yeah, it's usually best to put the luggage in the trunk. Suitcases are more suited to suits (heh, heh).

    You're absolutely right. What was I thinking? Now I really have proof that coding for more than 24 hours straight causes my brain to behave erratically. :P

  • (cs) in reply to lolwtf
    lolwtf:
    Why did he even send this email to Tammie when it was Tamme who broke the code? Also that picture is just terrible; maybe you can fix it when you finish the article. (It just kinda cuts off partway through a sentence there.)

    Are you kidding?

    The subject of the email will find out. Guaranteed. If you're going to say something bad about a coworker, you're best off if you:

    1. Write it as if you know they're going to get it. That is, be as gracious as you can be, without distorting facts, don't include derogatory comments, and so forth.
    2. Don't name people. If a group only contains one person, don't name it either. Try to avoid naming groups with only two people. Never name a group by their manager; use their group name instead - even if it's something stupid, like Enterprise Best Practices Improvement Team.
    3. Make sure the subject is included in the distribution. However, if you have a mailing list for everyone else, it's better to Bcc the subject or forward the message after hitting send to the main group than to add said individual as the only Cc - part of not naming names.

    Of course, Bccing the subject can have an exposure effect also, as I learned a few years ago. I had dealt with a late night computer problem caused by someone with whom I used to work; this afflicted everyone in my current group (we all got hundreds of emails from our systems complaining of the problem.) So I sent out an email to my current group's mailing list[1], and mentioned that the problem resulted from some code which did not check its return values, and had been put into production without going through review. I Bcced the person who wrote it and put it into production. That person then replied to the list, saying that he didn't think he should be on that list any more, since he'd left the group.

    This could've been politically worse than it was, because everyone there knew how I address these emails. Everyone in my group instantly knew, when they saw his response, that he had to have been the author of the code. Fortunately, everyone had also learned the value of focusing on fixing problems, rather than fixing blame - especially since the potential blame target clearly had enough problems with his new management.

    [1] I also entered a bug tracking item, attached the original code[2] and the change to it, tagged it 'breakfix', and submitted it to QA, but that's a completely separate matter.

    [2] Only because the original code wasn't reviewed.

  • Still Not Tim (unregistered)

    The Real WTF ?

    Commenters decrying the management for "not reading or not understanding the original email", then decrying Tammie Burns as a poor programmer - thus showing that they themselves have not understood the original email...

  • Still Not Tim (unregistered) in reply to Still Not Tim
    Still Not Tim:
    The Real WTF ?

    Commenters decrying the management for "not reading or not understanding the original email", then decrying Tammie Burns as a poor programmer - thus showing that they themselves have not understood the original email...

    That joke was funny when I typed it, but looking at it in print, it doesn't really work without the tone of voice and facial expressions...

    Move along, nothing to see here.

    "Humour ? It is a difficult concept." o_0

  • Shane (unregistered)

    Similar thing happened to me except they took the her word over mine; I was fired and walked to the door.

  • pat (unregistered)

    Way to be a twat, Tammie! Learn to read. Learn to code.

  • nobody (unregistered) in reply to s0be
    In most corporate environments, if you have a problem with a cow-orker, you take it to *YOUR* superior.
    In most states, bestiality is against the law, so you might think of calling the local fuzz if you run into someone orking a cow.
  • Dick Riculous (unregistered) in reply to WTFiswithWTFreaders
    WTFiswithWTFreaders:
    From the article: "Tamme Burns, the developer responsible for the loader, decided to add..."

    From your follow-up: "Tammie Burns was not the developer responsible for the problem..."

    Which is it? You can't have it both ways.

    Well, clearly, I would say the original submitter has it down right. The Daily WTF needs to stop fictionalizing stories and keep it at "True Story - only the names have been changed."

    Coincidentally, misplace a comma and: The packet assembly code is working fine, and our packet parsing code is working fine, but the code between us and Tammie Burns needs to be beaten into submission.

    Becomes: The packet assembly code is working fine, and our packet parsing code is working fine but the code between us, and Tammie Burns needs to be beaten into submission.

    The sentence still makes perfect sense, even if the meaning has been considerably warped.

    Also, quoting for everyone who didn't read this:

    Dan Wiebe:
    Wow. My first submission, published. I'm surprised at the degree to which it was fictionalized.

    I should clarify, in case somebody who knows her reads this, that Tammie Burns was not the developer responsible for the problem. I don't know who that developer was. She was the manager of the group responsible for producing the data, and I was in the group responsible for consuming it. Between the two groups, it went into Never-Never Land and came back, and somewhere in Never-Never Land was the place where the CR character was helpfully being added.

    That's why I said "the code between us and Tammie Burns" rather than "Tammie Burns' code."

    Just sayin'...

  • steveoc (unregistered)

    I had to work back late and by 5am i was already fucked. Tammie burns in the board room told me that this was all fixed. Seems like it needed more work. This is the second time that Tammie thought she did a great job and made lots of noise to everyone about her coding prowess, but personally I was not satisfied by the quality of her testing. The board room is not the best place to discuss technical specifications and details so next time Ill give it to her in the ass -signment theatre, which has much better facilities.

  • renny (unregistered)

    The WTF starts with the inappropriate email. Calling out a specific person and the use of "beaten into submission" just doesn't belong in a professional work environment, especially when the email was sent to such a large group, I don't care how tired you are.

    YES, the subsequent chain of misinterpretation and overreaction was a bit laughable, but that doesn't change how inappropriate the email was. Even if no one had reacted, if I were Greg I would have a chat with Dan about how to deliver the message more appropriately.

    NO, I'm not saying the developer shouldn't be called out, this just isn't the way to do it.

  • Kevin (unregistered) in reply to Anon

    If possible, I think someone should put in at least minimal effort to ensure that there's not some kind of misunderstanding before reporting somebody. Now, if the situation involves immediate or grievous harm, that's different, but even Tammie Burns recognized that it was a joke (and she merely thought it was a distasteful joke), so that's not the case here. In this case, her due diligence would've basically just been to actually read the email. This is not an unreasonable expectation.

    And, of course, what makes it worse is her line about "especially against a woman", because, clearly, threats of violence are acceptable if they involve two men or a woman threatening a man. No. Threats should be taken seriously regardless of the sexes of those involved.

Leave a comment on “Beaten Into Submission”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article