Unix administration - Low life admins

Author

Low life admins

OICU812

2005-05-17, 2:49 am

This subject/label certainly doesn't apply to all,
but over the years, essentially since the inception of the internet,
I've had the misfortune of crossing paths with a good many
prima donna, egotistical, megalomaniac, dick-headed system administrators
who, for God knows what reason, think they're completely unacountable,
and completely incapable of common courtesy, or respect for the people
they "serve", or in some cases, even their superiors.
I know it's easy to get cynical, and run out of patience with some users,
but it used to be that (most) old-school, administrators had a fair amount
of integrity and took [our] responsibilities seriously.

I've even discussed it with other sysadmins (whom I believe to be fairly
normal), and many
agree that there is a good many system admins out there, (regardless of the
"flavor",
or even if it's your IT Windows Admin) that share this personality defect,
aka unbearable, pompous XXX!

Personally, I think they're either insecure, or they think they're a cut
above
the rest of us and have an ego problem. (Similar to your local musician who
is a
"legend in his own mind", perhaps)

I recently quit an excellent job, after 4 years with a telecomm company,
giving up over $100,000 a year, because I got fed up with the runaround from
these types.Trying to get info, i.e. password info
to access servers I was supposed to be responsible for. I was getting
pressure from my superiors,
and users for SOP maintenance issues.
My predecessor left w/o giving passwords to anyone, and the "contacts" he
named
that would have the info denied all knowledge. (Great teamwork!)

I truly believe (as administrators) we have a responsibility not only to our
users, but
to one another, NOT to withhold information. It's so frustrating, I'd like
to just straighten
these kinds of problems out by beating the hell out of the same, insecure,
passive-aggressive,
dick-heads!
But I suppose these types aren't familiar with terms like,
"responsibility", and "integrity".
I imagine they're the same one's that leave the workplace to go home and
spread viruses
and spam.

Opinions?

Just venting my $.02 -rj

Michael Vilain

2005-05-17, 7:48 am

In article <x5eie.58$NF.11286@news.uswest.net>,
"OICU812" <nulladdress237@qwest.net> wrote:

> This subject/label certainly doesn't apply to all,
> but over the years, essentially since the inception of the internet,
> I've had the misfortune of crossing paths with a good many
> prima donna, egotistical, megalomaniac, dick-headed system administrators
> who, for God knows what reason, think they're completely unacountable,
> and completely incapable of common courtesy, or respect for the people
> they "serve", or in some cases, even their superiors.
> I know it's easy to get cynical, and run out of patience with some users,
> but it used to be that (most) old-school, administrators had a fair amount
> of integrity and took [our] responsibilities seriously.
>
> I've even discussed it with other sysadmins (whom I believe to be fairly
> normal), and many
> agree that there is a good many system admins out there, (regardless of the
> "flavor",
> or even if it's your IT Windows Admin) that share this personality defect,
> aka unbearable, pompous XXX!
>
> Personally, I think they're either insecure, or they think they're a cut
> above
> the rest of us and have an ego problem. (Similar to your local musician who
> is a
> "legend in his own mind", perhaps)
>
> I recently quit an excellent job, after 4 years with a telecomm company,
> giving up over $100,000 a year, because I got fed up with the runaround from
> these types.Trying to get info, i.e. password info
> to access servers I was supposed to be responsible for. I was getting
> pressure from my superiors,
> and users for SOP maintenance issues.
> My predecessor left w/o giving passwords to anyone, and the "contacts" he
> named
> that would have the info denied all knowledge. (Great teamwork!)
>
> I truly believe (as administrators) we have a responsibility not only to our
> users, but
> to one another, NOT to withhold information. It's so frustrating, I'd like
> to just straighten
> these kinds of problems out by beating the hell out of the same, insecure,
> passive-aggressive,
> dick-heads!
> But I suppose these types aren't familiar with terms like,
> "responsibility", and "integrity".
> I imagine they're the same one's that leave the workplace to go home and
> spread viruses
> and spam.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Just venting my $.02 -rj

Time for a career change and a chance to learn how to cross-post to
usenet

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...

Dave Hinz

2005-05-17, 5:57 pm

On Mon, 16 May 2005 21:05:49 -0700, OICU812 <nulladdress237@qwest.net> wrote:
> This subject/label certainly doesn't apply to all,
> but over the years, essentially since the inception of the internet,
> I've had the misfortune of crossing paths with a good many
> prima donna, egotistical, megalomaniac, dick-headed system administrators
> who, for God knows what reason, think they're completely unacountable,

If you keep running into that, you should at least give some consideration
to the possibility that you are part of the problem. I can count on one
hand the number of admins I've met who were like that.

> and completely incapable of common courtesy, or respect for the people
> they "serve", or in some cases, even their superiors.

Ah. Yes, there's part of your problem. We don't "serve" anyone, we
_work with you_, to _fix your problems for you_.

> I know it's easy to get cynical, and run out of patience with some users,
> but it used to be that (most) old-school, administrators had a fair amount
> of integrity and took [our] responsibilities seriously.

Of course. The vast majority that I know, have good integrity and
do take our responsibilities seriously. The bad ones don't last long.

> I've even discussed it with other sysadmins (whom I believe to be fairly
> normal), and many
> agree that there is a good many system admins out there, (regardless of the
> "flavor",
> or even if it's your IT Windows Admin) that share this personality defect,
> aka unbearable, pompous XXX!

Where are you going with all of this, I wonder?

> I recently quit an excellent job, after 4 years with a telecomm company,
> giving up over $100,000 a year, because I got fed up with the runaround from
> these types.Trying to get info, i.e. password info
> to access servers I was supposed to be responsible for. I was getting
> pressure from my superiors,
> and users for SOP maintenance issues.

Yes, that's part of the job. You don't get access to a box until you
need access to that box. Stuff breaks and you're responsible. That's
how it works; that's what the job is.

> My predecessor left w/o giving passwords to anyone, and the "contacts" he
> named
> that would have the info denied all knowledge. (Great teamwork!)

Sounds like a good place to be _from_.

> I truly believe (as administrators) we have a responsibility not only to our
> users, but
> to one another, NOT to withhold information. It's so frustrating, I'd like
> to just straighten
> these kinds of problems out by beating the hell out of the same, insecure,
> passive-aggressive,
> dick-heads!

Techie people are, by nature, going to be opinionated. The good ones
are the ones who say "Hey, let me show you this" instead of "I know
something you don't know, nyah nyah nyah". If your employer values
the latter rather than the former, get a better employer.

> But I suppose these types aren't familiar with terms like,
> "responsibility", and "integrity".
> I imagine they're the same one's that leave the workplace to go home and
> spread viruses
> and spam.

I doubt that.

> Opinions?

Yeah, what's your point in all this?

jsalminen

2005-05-18, 2:49 am

This post was ideal flamebait. prepare yourself for attack from those who
you just epitomized.

"OICU812" <nulladdress237@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:x5eie.58$NF.11286@news.uswest.net...
> This subject/label certainly doesn't apply to all,
> but over the years, essentially since the inception of the internet,
> I've had the misfortune of crossing paths with a good many
> prima donna, egotistical, megalomaniac, dick-headed system administrators
> who, for God knows what reason, think they're completely unacountable,
> and completely incapable of common courtesy, or respect for the people
> they "serve", or in some cases, even their superiors.
> I know it's easy to get cynical, and run out of patience with some
> users,
> but it used to be that (most) old-school, administrators had a fair amount
> of integrity and took [our] responsibilities seriously.
>
> I've even discussed it with other sysadmins (whom I believe to be fairly
> normal), and many
> agree that there is a good many system admins out there, (regardless of
> the
> "flavor",
> or even if it's your IT Windows Admin) that share this personality defect,
> aka unbearable, pompous XXX!
>
> Personally, I think they're either insecure, or they think they're a cut
> above
> the rest of us and have an ego problem. (Similar to your local musician
> who
> is a
> "legend in his own mind", perhaps)
>
> I recently quit an excellent job, after 4 years with a telecomm company,
> giving up over $100,000 a year, because I got fed up with the runaround
> from
> these types.Trying to get info, i.e. password info
> to access servers I was supposed to be responsible for. I was getting
> pressure from my superiors,
> and users for SOP maintenance issues.
> My predecessor left w/o giving passwords to anyone, and the "contacts" he
> named
> that would have the info denied all knowledge. (Great teamwork!)
>
> I truly believe (as administrators) we have a responsibility not only to
> our
> users, but
> to one another, NOT to withhold information. It's so frustrating, I'd like
> to just straighten
> these kinds of problems out by beating the hell out of the same, insecure,
> passive-aggressive,
> dick-heads!
> But I suppose these types aren't familiar with terms like,
> "responsibility", and "integrity".
> I imagine they're the same one's that leave the workplace to go home and
> spread viruses
> and spam.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Just venting my $.02 -rj
>
>

Moe Trin

2005-05-19, 2:48 am

In article <3eufneF52nk5U1@individual.net>, Dave Hinz wrote:
>On Mon, 16 May 2005 21:05:49 -0700, OICU812 <nulladdress237@qwest.net> wrote:

>If you keep running into that, you should at least give some consideration
>to the possibility that you are part of the problem. I can count on one
>hand the number of admins I've met who were like that.

I have to agree with that - especially when it's happening frequently
enough to be commented on. Who was it who said:

"If one person calls you an XXX, you may safely ignore him.

If practially everyone calls you an XXX, you may need to be
fitted for a saddle and bridle."

There's something missing here. If those boxes are your responsibility (and
not mine), there's no way I am not going to give you the password. On the
other hand, if it's just some application on that server that you're
responsible for, and not the box itself, there might be some other major
issues that you haven't mentioned.
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Sounds like a good place to be _from_.

Yup - on the other hand, physical access beats five aces any day.

>
>I doubt that.

Did you check this clowns headers?
[vbcol=seagreen]

Whatever.

Old guy

jon@parmetpc.volpe.dot.gov

2005-05-19, 5:52 pm

Dave Hinz wrote:
>
> Yeah, what's your point in all this?

The OP is a little beyond the threshold of the spectrum typically
established back here on earth ;) But maybe there's a stream of recent
information out there that's spawning a post like the OP, as there was
an article I read on the subway ride into work. Just yesterday in one
of the local paper's "Business Today" section there was: "Blame it on
the IT deparment"

http://business.bostonherald.com/te...articleid=83573

Too bad the picture on that page is cropped. The human is actually in
the right 1/3 of the picture.

At the top/left the caption read:

"We'll get right on it"
"Corporate information technology departments cojntinue to be a source
of headaches for frustrated office workers. The biggest beef: never
being able to get an answer from IT."

To left of the exasperated human is the monitor's full screen with the
words "CONTACT HELP DESK" at the bottom and the skull/crossbones icon
at the top ;)

Underneath all of that are three boxes with a title "Top complaints
about IT" and the boxes contain (from L-R):

Lack of Help-Desk Support
IT Communication Breakdown
Software and PC Problems

Make of it what you will. It's only a study.... Who knows, there may
have been a computer glitch in compiling the statistics :P

Regards,
Jon

Michael Vilain

2005-05-19, 5:52 pm

In article <1116511203.251882.129670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
jon@parmetpc.volpe.dot.gov wrote:

> Dave Hinz wrote:
>
> The OP is a little beyond the threshold of the spectrum typically
> established back here on earth ;) But maybe there's a stream of recent
> information out there that's spawning a post like the OP, as there was
> an article I read on the subway ride into work. Just yesterday in one
> of the local paper's "Business Today" section there was: "Blame it on
> the IT deparment"
>
> http://business.bostonherald.com/te...articleid=83573
>
> Too bad the picture on that page is cropped. The human is actually in
> the right 1/3 of the picture.
>
> At the top/left the caption read:
>
> "We'll get right on it"
> "Corporate information technology departments cojntinue to be a source
> of headaches for frustrated office workers. The biggest beef: never
> being able to get an answer from IT."
>
> To left of the exasperated human is the monitor's full screen with the
> words "CONTACT HELP DESK" at the bottom and the skull/crossbones icon
> at the top ;)
>
> Underneath all of that are three boxes with a title "Top complaints
> about IT" and the boxes contain (from L-R):
>
> Lack of Help-Desk Support
> IT Communication Breakdown
> Software and PC Problems
>
>
> Make of it what you will. It's only a study.... Who knows, there may
> have been a computer glitch in compiling the statistics :P
>
>
> Regards,
> Jon

From the other end of this, it's rather hard to run a shop when all you
do is fight fires. Management typically likes to run "lean" with IT, so
we get understaffed and typically have to automate as much of our
day-to-day jobs as possible. A staffed help desk for front-line
problems is _required_ to do track and schedule problems. Without it,
you get people complaining they can't get ahold of IT all the time.
Having a personal IT minion always at one's beck and call is typically
the privilege of the CEO, not Marge in accounting.

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050510
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050511
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050514
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050516
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050517
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050518

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...