• Ed (unregistered)

    Bit of a slow day in wtf-land then?

  • Caffeine (unregistered)

    TRWTF is that I got about half way through this before going 'hang on this sounds familiar' then another 1/4 further down before I bothered to notice the 'classic WTF' in the tile and the really obvious 'was originally published ' line....

    Or maybe TRWTF is daylight savings that means I am reading this at midnight rather than the normal 11pm causing such tired errors....

  • Caffeine (unregistered) in reply to Ed
    Ed:
    Bit of a slow day in wtf-land then?

    It's a bit like that lately isn't it? I have to wonder if there are 10 submissions a day (include weekends), so 70 a week, but we seem to be having a lot of Classic's, variations on a well-worn theme or 30 year old references.

    Makes me glad I'm not Alex if there are more than 65 submissions a week that aren't worth posting.

    Note from Alex: There are a lot of submissions, and there are some fantastic stories in the queue... but until I figure out how to self.fork(), I've got work (which has gotten a bit crazy), family, and my new pet project: rehabing a horrid dump of a house into my new home. Thankfully, after a over year, that's almost done...

  • Anon (unregistered)

    What the hell is with "classic" WTFs?

    It's not like they're bringing anything back...I can just go find the old one if I wanted to read it, right?

    Basically it's just "I don't feel like it today...here...read this old one".

    I can't imagine there's a lack of material available.

  • snoofle (cs)

    On the other hand.... we don't know how busy Alex et al are; this was funny the first time, and it's still funny - 3 years later because it's so typical.

  • sadwings (unregistered)

    I demand more up-to-date content on this free website.

    Days off, lack of submissions, not-feeling-good... none of these are acceptable reasons for making me read something from the archives.

    gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme

  • Anon (unregistered)

    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

  • th30519 (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I'm sure its a lot harder than posting cowardly anonymous rants about lack of free content. Go somewhere else and complain.

    Keep up the good work Alex.

  • Drew (unregistered)

    You are all welcome to create a competing service and prove your assertions through competition. :D

    I, on the other hand, enjoy reading these Classic ones. No way I'm ever going to spend the time to go back and read the whole archive.

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to th30519
    th30519:
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I'm sure its a lot harder than posting cowardly anonymous rants about lack of free content. Go somewhere else and complain.

    Keep up the good work Alex.

    So the idea of having negative feedback is foreign to you? The idea is that if you're not happy with something,instead of trying find out what's going on or voice your opinion, you should just give up and leave?

    And yes, I'm sure everyone that's anonymous on the Internet is a coward. (Not like you, "th30519".)

  • Anon (unregistered)

    I can understand sending the instructions in wingdings one time just to prove they aren't reading them, but doing it 12 times before bothering to prove your point is TRWTF. Do it once, deployment fails, they claim to have followed the instructions, you call them out on it because your instructions were unreadable. Problem solved (or else you get fired). What was the point of doing it another 11 times with another 11 failed deployments? Seems rather passive aggressive.

  • RBoy (unregistered)

    This story is a wing-dinger.

    Captcha: What's my vector Vereor?

  • Dwayne (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    What the hell is with "classic" WTFs?

    It's not like they're bringing anything back...I can just go find the old one if I wanted to read it, right?

    Basically it's just "I don't feel like it today...here...read this old one".

    I can't imagine there's a lack of material available.

    All aboard the entitlement train! Choo choo!

  • Hobo (unregistered)

    I'm with network / server / deployment team on this one. No way they could do anything wrong. It just does not happen. Whatever they did, it's simply because development screwed something. They just saved devs from devselves!

  • anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Hobo

    groan

  • vdy (unregistered)

    TRWTF is using Windows (for Wingdings)

  • nikola (unregistered) in reply to Anon

    What do people do who haven't read that particular wtf-story? Or what do new visitors do? They don't know of the existence of the story. How do they find it, how do they develop the urge to read it in the first place if they don't know it exists?

    Promoting classics is a way of CRMing new visitors.

    Quit bitchin' and just skip the entry if the title says "Classic WTF: ..."

  • !? (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    th30519:
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I'm sure its a lot harder than posting cowardly anonymous rants about lack of free content. Go somewhere else and complain.

    Keep up the good work Alex.

    So the idea of having negative feedback is foreign to you? The idea is that if you're not happy with something,instead of trying find out what's going on or voice your opinion, you should just give up and leave?

    And yes, I'm sure everyone that's anonymous on the Internet is a coward. (Not like you, "th30519".)

    Yeah, don't you realize how much effort we put in our static, but loud, insatisfaction. Complaining is hard.

    Anyway, if you actually think anonimity is just cowardice, th30519, you probably never put any real effort in exposing a opinion or information of actual value or politic relevance... like me. Yay! :D

  • Basseq (unregistered)

    This WTF Explained:

    1. Silo'd organizational structure and ham-fisted IT management techniques lead to frustration.
    2. Infrastructure group has problems installing code despite detailed instructions.
    3. Development manager, smelling a rat, starts sending gibberish instead of real installation instructions.
    4. No one in the Infrastructure group notices, proving that they don't read the instructions (as claimed).
    5. Months later, problems stemming from #1 compound multiple times, leading to finger-pointing.
    6. Dev. Manager proves a point with haughty nerd superiority. Organizational problems remain.
  • JohnB (unregistered) in reply to snoofle
    snoofle:
    On the other hand.... we don't know how busy Alex et al are; this was funny the first time, and it's still funny - 3 years later because it's so typical.
    When did Alex start working with Al?
  • ♓&&●❍ (unregistered) in reply to Ed

    ✏✂✁☎✆✉

    ⌛⌨✇✍✌☜ ☞☝☟ ☺☹☠⚐ ✈☼ ❄✞✠✡☪☯ॐ☸♈♉ ♊♋♌♍♎ ♏♐♑♒♓&&●❍■□❑❒⬧ ⧫◆❖⬥ ⌧⍓⌘ ❀✿❝❞▯⓪①② ③④⑤❾❿·• ▪○◉ ◎ ▪◻✦★✶✴✹✵✪✰

  • Fortytruth (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    I can understand sending the instructions in wingdings one time just to prove they aren't reading them, but doing it 12 times before bothering to prove your point is TRWTF. Do it once, deployment fails, they claim to have followed the instructions, you call them out on it because your instructions were unreadable. Problem solved (or else you get fired). What was the point of doing it another 11 times with another 11 failed deployments? Seems rather passive aggressive.
    Calling on it immediately after first would be risky. In fact, calling them at all on it would be very risky. From the article, I understand that only the font was changed to wingdings, but the text was still real. A mere font change could have solved the issue, if the instructions were distributed in digital form. (or someone could have just learned to read the wingdings)

    If the development department had approached the issue, the network department could have simply said that they changed the font and read the text. There would have been no proof that the network department had not actually looked at the document and not understood it.

    However, since it's the network department that brought it up by saying it's complete gibberish, it eliminates the possibility, that they had understood to change the font or that they had been able to read it in any way. After all, a key point in their argument was that they had been following the instructions and the development department had simply failed to provide the correct instructions.

    What's more important, and why more than single set of instructions was needed, was the statement "amidst all the deployment problems", which clearly indicates that the network department was not even aware that the previous instructions were in wingdings. In other words, this proves that they had never even looked at them. This is not something that you can accomplish with just one set of gibberish instructions.

    To prove their point, the development department had to keep sending the instructions in windings until they were called for it.

  • justsomedude (unregistered) in reply to Fortytruth

    I, for one, welcome our new symbolic overlords.

  • MojoFilter (unregistered) in reply to ♓&&●❍

    tehe

    (That's my contribution)

  • jimlangrunner (cs)

    Well, BUSTED!

    And thank you, Alex, for all you do. I do enjoy just about everything you post here. I even visit the sponsors.

  • pmdouble3012@gmail.com (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    th30519:
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I'm sure its a lot harder than posting cowardly anonymous rants about lack of free content. Go somewhere else and complain.

    Keep up the good work Alex.

    So the idea of having negative feedback is foreign to you? The idea is that if you're not happy with something,instead of trying find out what's going on or voice your opinion, you should just give up and leave?

    And yes, I'm sure everyone who is anonymous on the Internet is a coward. (Not like you, "th30519".)

    FTFY.

    Step outside, kid. Anonymity is fine; in fact, cowardice is fine. Even negative feedback is fine, so long as it's constructive.

    I don't think "Waah! It's a repeat!" is particularly constructive.

    And, if you're going to be anonymous, could you at least choose a goddamn moniker? It helps with the indexing and replying and stuff. If you call yourself "Anon," we're entitled to think that you're a /.tard.

    I've not read the OP before, and it's given me more ideas about how to handle my next few WTF jobs than the last ten Regexp, VB, and PHP posts put together.

    Just because you're anonymous ... it doesn't mean your opinion is worth a gnat's spit.

  • !? (unregistered) in reply to Basseq
    Basseq:
    This WTF Explained:
    1. Silo'd organizational structure and ham-fisted IT management techniques lead to frustration.
    2. Infrastructure group has problems installing code despite detailed instructions.
    3. Development manager, smelling a rat, starts sending gibberish instead of real installation instructions.
    4. No one in the Infrastructure group notices, proving that they don't read the instructions (as claimed).
    5. Months later, problems stemming from #1 compound multiple times, leading to finger-pointing.
    6. Dev. Manager proves a point with haughty nerd superiority. Organizational problems remain.

    6# is only expected. As it seem, they have had problems with management for a long time. I doubt IT team could do anything to change.

    Most management WTFs don't lead to change, unless the problems they create become unbearable.

  • bored (unregistered)

    I would have been fired for sending wingdings once, I am more curious as to what happened to the developer who did this.

    captcha: jugis - No more sexual references regarding these (seems to offend people), even though this one is hard to pass up :)

  • RHuckster (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    th30519:
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I'm sure its a lot harder than posting cowardly anonymous rants about lack of free content. Go somewhere else and complain.

    Keep up the good work Alex.

    So the idea of having negative feedback is foreign to you? The idea is that if you're not happy with something,instead of trying find out what's going on or voice your opinion, you should just give up and leave?

    And yes, I'm sure everyone that's anonymous on the Internet is a coward. (Not like you, "th30519".)

    He rarely posts classic WTFs... it's not like he's doing it every other day. I mean, sheesh, even daily TV programs like late night standup and game shows have their weeks off during the year, and they get far more money from sponsors than this site. Get over it.

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Fortytruth
    Fortytruth:

    If the development department had approached the issue, the network department could have simply said that they changed the font and read the text.

    Oh come on, how likely is that? In that case, ask them to read the instructions back to you over the phone.

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to pmdouble3012@gmail.com
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Iie (unregistered) in reply to Basseq
    Basseq:
    This WTF Explained:
    1. Silo'd organizational structure and ham-fisted IT management techniques lead to frustration.

    2. Infrastructure group has problems installing code despite detailed instructions.

    3. Development manager, smelling a rat, starts sending gibberish instead of real installation instructions.

    4. No one in the Infrastructure group notices, proving that they don't read the instructions (as claimed).

    5. Months later, problems stemming from #1 compound multiple times, leading to finger-pointing.

    6. Dev. Manager proves a point with haughty nerd superiority. Organizational problems remain.

    • Infrastructure manager is canned for failing to enforce the "follow the damn instructions" rule.

    • New manager is hired, underlings are scared shitless because he's going to clean up. 9 - 12. ???

    • Infrastructure has 50% layoffs and 75% of the remaining positions are being sunsetted so they can be outsourced

    • Company saves a bunch of money.

    • Development doesn't see a dime of it.

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    On the other hand, I don't particularly give a shit if you can't keep straight which Anon is which.
    Easy. I'm obviously posting from my anonym right now.
  • Tom Woolf (unregistered)

    Many years ago when I worked for Giant Entity we had an IT guy ask about a report that our system generated. "We are thinking of turning off the FARxyz Report. Does anybody use it?" One of the users, who was known as the Queen of 62 (IT code for time wasted on wild goose chases), said it could not be turned off - she used it every month. The IT guy responded "that's funny, because we actually stopped printing it 3 months ago..."

  • CrazyBomber (too lazy to login) (unregistered) in reply to Anon

    Alex, since Self.Fork() only applies to single-cell organisms (which is clearly not the case for any IT department), may I suggest invoking Self.FindSomeoneToHelp()? It does require resources, but it should pay off soon enough :-D

  • pmdouble3012@gmail.com (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Comment held for moderation.
  • NonAnon (unregistered)

    Even with a new story, we still get the same comments.

    captcha= "bene" there done that

  • Get a life, dweebs (unregistered)

    Anyone who thinks "/.tard" is clever or remotely cool is TRWTF.

  • pmdouble3012@gmail.com (unregistered) in reply to Get a life, dweebs
    Get a life:
    Anyone who thinks "/.tard" is clever or remotely cool is TRWTF.
    Hey, you have your cultural values; I have mine.

    It's short-hand for "pointless idiot throwing an anonymous brain-dead comment out at random." It's applicable to a fair slice of slashdot comments these days.

    It doesn't have to be clever, or cool. In fact, it wasn't meant to be. It just has to save me from carpal tunnel syndrome.

    It'd be nice if I could find a +5 warlock spell to ward off ninnies ... but I'll deal with what I have.

    kthxbye

  • A Nonny Mouse (cs)

    why is everyone so tetchy today?

  • jay (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    So the idea of having negative feedback is foreign to you? The idea is that if you're not happy with something,instead of trying find out what's going on or voice your opinion, you should just give up and leave?

    And yes, I'm sure everyone that's anonymous on the Internet is a coward. (Not like you, "th30519".)

    Just because th30519's parents gave him an unusual name is no reason to make fun of him! How would you like it if people made fun of your cultural heritage?

  • shadowman (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I doubt the ad money covers a whole lot more than keeping the site running.

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to shadowman
    shadowman:
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I doubt the ad money covers a whole lot more than keeping the site running.

    Nonsense! The reason why we have a classic WTF today is because Alex just took delivery of his new gold plated Ferrari.

  • Zapp Brannigan (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    shadowman:
    Anon:
    He's making money from the site isn't he? That's why we have ads everywhere, sponsor appreciation updates, etc.

    Besides, how hard is it to buffer up a few short and simple WTFs for days like this?

    I doubt the ad money covers a whole lot more than keeping the site running.

    Nonsense! The reason why we have a classic WTF today is because Alex just took delivery of his new gold plated Ferrari.

    I thought he rented an entire floor of some big hotel in Las Vegas and was hot tubbing with $5000 a night hookers.

  • J. Random PMP (unregistered) in reply to Basseq
    Basseq:
    This WTF Explained:
    1. Silo'd organizational structure and ham-fisted IT management techniques lead to frustration.
    2. Infrastructure group has problems installing code despite detailed instructions.
    3. Development manager, smelling a rat, starts sending gibberish instead of real installation instructions.
    4. No one in the Infrastructure group notices, proving that they don't read the instructions (as claimed).
    5. Months later, problems stemming from #1 compound multiple times, leading to finger-pointing.
    6. Dev. Manager proves a point with haughty nerd superiority. Organizational problems remain.

    Scary...it's like you work somewhere in my organization!

    CAPTCHA: immitto...do that. Really, I did!

  • J.R. “Bob” Dobbs (unregistered)

    A friend who happens to be a lawyer (yeah, I know, the two terms seem to be somewhat antinomic) told me a similar story. Apparently, in my country, when a lawyer has to plead in a bar where he hasn't been admitted, he needs to hire a “proxy lawyer” to review and file the memoranda in his stead. Suspecting that a particular lawyer who provided this service was just filing the documents without giving them the slightest review, he wrote (in the middle of the document to file) something to the effect of “I hereby affirm that [name of lawyer] is an incompetent and a fraud. And I'm pretty sure he will confirm this himself by appying his hand and seal to this text and filing it with the court”. Needless to say, the document was filed as is, and the judge nearly died from laughter... Poetic justice, I would say.

  • rfsmit (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    I can understand sending the instructions in wingdings one time just to prove they aren't reading them, but doing it 12 times before bothering to prove your point is TRWTF. Do it once, deployment fails, they claim to have followed the instructions, you call them out on it because your instructions were unreadable. Problem solved (or else you get fired). What was the point of doing it another 11 times with another 11 failed deployments? Seems rather passive aggressive.
    Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

    Yes, a classic case of passive-aggressive communication.

    But it goes further than that. Why was the meeting between the two teams not set up after the first failed deployment?

    Indeed, why was it not set up before the first attempt; to ensure a smooth deployment?

    Kinda silly, whichever way you look at it.

  • Pffft!!! (unregistered)

    Way back in school I had a software engineering prof who loved his documents... groups had to complete and hand-in Software Requirements Doc, Architectural Design doc, Detailed Design doc, Testing and Implementation doc, and User Manual for a library system we had to build. By the time the class finished the Architectural Design and received our grades, we were all convinced that he simply put the docs on a laboratory scale to give out grades. 1 lb = C, 2 lbs = B, 3 lbs+ = A. So we padded our Testing and Implementation doc with recipes for making pizzas as part of our testing methodology... find a bug, fix it, make a pizza - pizza making instructions - continue. Some 8 different 'make a pizza' recipes were present in our Testing and Implementation doc at different points, along with the spec's for a beer bash following a successful implementation on the CS department Prime system. The TA read all this in the doc, and called us on it, but was willing to let it slide if we invited her to the bash. We did, she did, and nary a word from the professor.

  • rfsmit (cs) in reply to A Nonny Mouse
    A Nonny Mouse:
    why is everyone so tetchy today?
    It's Tetchy Tuesday!
  • Neville Flynn (unregistered) in reply to CrazyBomber (too lazy to login)
    CrazyBomber (too lazy to login):
    Alex, since Self.Fork() only applies to single-cell organisms (which is clearly not the case for any IT department), may I suggest invoking Self.FindSomeoneToHelp()? It does require resources, but it should pay off soon enough :-D

    helper = self.findSomeoneToHelp(); helper.paySalary(); self.examineSmallerBankAccount(); self.cry();

Leave a comment on “Classic WTF: Symbolic Installation”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article