Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22

Based on a true story.

Lynn

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 4:46:49 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>
> Based on a true story.
>
> Lynn

This would never happen to Dagwood Bumstead too...

In article <2d1f1bf3-1467-40db-b5b5-08ffd2e9429fn@googlegroups.com>,
Darryl H <heinedarryl@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 4:46:49 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>
>> Based on a true story.
>>
>> Lynn
>
>This would never happen to Dagwood Bumstead too...

"Blondie" is kind of an anti-Dilbert because the tropes are reversed.
Dagwood is actually apparently quite bad at his job, and Mr. Dithers is
a sharp cookie.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 10/23/22 2:12 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <2d1f1bf3-1467-40db-b5b5-08ffd2e9429fn@googlegroups.com>,
> Darryl H <heinedarryl@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 4:46:49 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>
>>> Based on a true story.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>
>> This would never happen to Dagwood Bumstead too...
>
> "Blondie" is kind of an anti-Dilbert because the tropes are reversed.
> Dagwood is actually apparently quite bad at his job, and Mr. Dithers is
> a sharp cookie.

Well, these things work out in various ways. Consider Henry Tremblechin
and Mr. Bigdome.

--
John W. Kennedy
Algernon Burbage, Lord Roderick, Father Martin, Bishop Baldwin,
King Pellinore, Captain Bailey, Merlin -- A Kingdom for a Stage!

Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>
> Based on a true story.

I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
for decades.

Thomas Koenig wrote:

>Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>
>> Based on a true story.
>
>I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>for decades.

Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.

As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
interpretation to it.

Brian

On 11/6/2022 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>
>>> Based on a true story.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>> for decades.
>
> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.

As it happens today's Dilbert Classic on GoComics illustrates this nicely:

https://www.gocomics.com/dilbert-classics/2022/11/06

--
Mark Jackson - https://mark-jackson.online/
Reasoning will never make a man correct an ill opinion, which
by reasoning he never acquired: for in the course of things,
men always grow vicious before they become unbelievers.
- Jonathan Swift

On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>
>>> Based on a true story.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>> for decades.
>
> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>
> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
> interpretation to it.

It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.

Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.

--
John W. Kennedy
Algernon Burbage, Lord Roderick, Father Martin, Bishop Baldwin,
King Pellinore, Captain Bailey, Merlin -- A Kingdom for a Stage!

John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote in
news:FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com:

> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>
>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>
>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It
>>> is not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done
>>> so for decades.
>>
>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean
>> avoiding legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that
>> when your time at work is done, you are off duty. No answering
>> calls, emails or texts at night, weekends, vacations, that sort
>> of thing.
>>
>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>> interpretation to it.
>
> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to
> tell the boss that he’s just told you to do something
> impossible.
>
> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the
> mainframe era, and, for years, I was the only person who could
> respond to any sort of software emergency. If I had to put in 36
> hours straight, I had to; we were a billion-dollar company with
> only one computer (apart from factory-floor and laboratory
> minis), and the billing and the payroll had to keep rolling or
> there’d be Hell to pay.
>
"Work ethic" had a different menaing then. Or at least *had* a
meaning then.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>
>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>
>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>> for decades.
>>
>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>
>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>> interpretation to it.
>
>It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>
>Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.

(Hal Heydt)
I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.

At one company, we had three payroll systems. One for those paid
hourly. They got paychecks weekly. There was one incident
(before I worked there) where the checks got to a plant two
hours late...by which time there had been a wildcat strike going
for 90 minutes. So the hourly payroll HAD to run on time, no
matter what. The second system was for salaried employees.
Payment was twice a month. If checks got delayed, even if a day
or two, no big deal. So if that system blew up over night and
the fix wasn't something you could do over the phone, it could be
set aside until the morning when you got in to the office. The
third system was Pension Payroll. Checks went out monthly. No
real rush to fix problems.

Sort of the flip side of all that was an interesting company
policy. Any time a new benefit was added, salaried payroll got
it first. At one point, the unions negotiated adding dental
coverage. Policy dictated that it had to be added to Salaried
Payroll before the effective date for the Hourly Payroll. Adding
it to the payroll systems landed in my lap. With explicit orders
to keep and materials about it, including program listings, under
lock and key at least until the new benefit was announced.

On 11/8/2022 8:35 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
> John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>>> for decades.
>>>
>>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>>
>>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>>> interpretation to it.
>>
>> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>> boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>>
>> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>> era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>> of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>> we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>> factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>> to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.
>
911 Dispatch Systems on call programmer here.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

In article <tkeglo$cg6$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 11/8/2022 8:35 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>>>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>>>> for decades.
>>>>
>>>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>>>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>>>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>>>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>>>
>>>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>>>> interpretation to it.
>>>
>>> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>>> boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>>>
>>> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>>> era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>>> of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>>> we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>>> factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>>> to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.
>>
>911 Dispatch Systems on call programmer here.

(Hal Heydt)
So ALL your calls were dire emergencies.

On 11/10/2022 2:04 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tkeglo$cg6$1@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 11/8/2022 8:35 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>>>>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>>>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>>>>> for decades.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>>>>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>>>>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>>>>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>>>>> interpretation to it.
>>>>
>>>> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>>>> boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>>>> era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>>>> of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>>>> we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>>>> factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>>>> to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.
>>>
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.
>>>
>> 911 Dispatch Systems on call programmer here.
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> So ALL your calls were dire emergencies.

Well, all the after hours ones were. I had one weekend where I went to
work on Friday, went home at the end of my usual work day and was awake
until Monday morning dealing with 50 to 60 priority 1 TSRs (a normal
weekend would have half a dozen), THEN had to go in to the office Monday
morning because my supervisor had scheduled a meeting with me for
immediately after the Monday morning staff meeting without telling me
what it was about. I was the first give me report (all projects ahead
of schedule, which meant under-budget) and then passed out, having been
awake for 72+ hours straight at that point. Someone woke me when the
meeting ended, I staggered after my supervisor for our meeting. As soon
as we were in his office he told me he had rescheduled it. When we had
the meeting a few days later it was to reprimand me for falling asleep
in the staff meeting. o_O (Obviously that wasn't the original reason,
the real reason was so he could reprimand me for _something_ because the
company had new owners and was looking to lower payroll thru
"attrition". Even the HR person who was in the meeting with us agreed
with my complaint about that and that reprimand didn't go in my file.
Of course the supervisor just threw out another BS "reprimand" that I
was "too friendly" with the clients' personnel but he weasel worded that
enough that HR couldn't throw it out.)

Another one. When we got these after hours priority 1 calls the contact
was usually a dispatch supervisor or a senior dispatcher. Sometimes it
was someone in the agency's IT department. I got the page for this call
at 2am on a Sunday morning. Called the given number and the person who
answered identified themselves as the Chief of Police for <one of the
major west coast cities> and wanted to know why it was that as soon as
one of his officers had been shot _my_ system ground to a halt. (No
pressure. :P ) I finished connecting in to their system and quickly
saw what the problem was. They were overloading their network, too much
traffic because too many people were following the incident "live" and
they hadn't upgraded their network as we had advised when we installed
their system to be able to handle something like that. Called him back,
explained what I found and suggested that he have everyone who did NOT
have a NEED to be up to the second on the incident close out the window
they were following it on and just run a one-time 'query incident
history' when they wanted to see what the current situation was. I also
said I'd have our network people contact his IT department Monday
morning about upgrading their network to our recommended capacity. If
the Chief complained it never reached me and all the other programmers
agreed with my handling of it.

Do I win? :D

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

In article <tkkm9e$pc9s$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 11/10/2022 2:04 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <tkeglo$cg6$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/8/2022 8:35 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>> In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>> John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>>>>>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>>>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>>>>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>>>>>> for decades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>>>>>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>>>>>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>>>>>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>>>>>> interpretation to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>>>>> boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>>>>> era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>>>>> of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>>>>> we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>>>>> factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>>>>> to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.
>>>>
>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>> I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.
>>>>
>>> 911 Dispatch Systems on call programmer here.
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> So ALL your calls were dire emergencies.
>
>Well, all the after hours ones were. I had one weekend where I went to
>work on Friday, went home at the end of my usual work day and was awake
>until Monday morning dealing with 50 to 60 priority 1 TSRs (a normal
>weekend would have half a dozen), THEN had to go in to the office Monday
>morning because my supervisor had scheduled a meeting with me for
>immediately after the Monday morning staff meeting without telling me
>what it was about. I was the first give me report (all projects ahead
>of schedule, which meant under-budget) and then passed out, having been
>awake for 72+ hours straight at that point. Someone woke me when the
>meeting ended, I staggered after my supervisor for our meeting. As soon
>as we were in his office he told me he had rescheduled it. When we had
>the meeting a few days later it was to reprimand me for falling asleep
>in the staff meeting. o_O (Obviously that wasn't the original reason,
>the real reason was so he could reprimand me for _something_ because the
>company had new owners and was looking to lower payroll thru
>"attrition". Even the HR person who was in the meeting with us agreed
>with my complaint about that and that reprimand didn't go in my file.
>Of course the supervisor just threw out another BS "reprimand" that I
>was "too friendly" with the clients' personnel but he weasel worded that
>enough that HR couldn't throw it out.)
>
>Another one. When we got these after hours priority 1 calls the contact
>was usually a dispatch supervisor or a senior dispatcher. Sometimes it
>was someone in the agency's IT department. I got the page for this call
>at 2am on a Sunday morning. Called the given number and the person who
>answered identified themselves as the Chief of Police for <one of the
>major west coast cities> and wanted to know why it was that as soon as
>one of his officers had been shot _my_ system ground to a halt. (No
>pressure. :P ) I finished connecting in to their system and quickly
>saw what the problem was. They were overloading their network, too much
>traffic because too many people were following the incident "live" and
>they hadn't upgraded their network as we had advised when we installed
>their system to be able to handle something like that. Called him back,
>explained what I found and suggested that he have everyone who did NOT
>have a NEED to be up to the second on the incident close out the window
>they were following it on and just run a one-time 'query incident
>history' when they wanted to see what the current situation was. I also
>said I'd have our network people contact his IT department Monday
>morning about upgrading their network to our recommended capacity. If
>the Chief complained it never reached me and all the other programmers
>agreed with my handling of it.
>
>Do I win? :D

(Hal Heydt)
You win. Thos are certainly far more traumatic incidents than
anything I ever had to deal with.

While I din't have to *do* anything--other than get out of the
way--one shop I worked in had (1) an explosive concentration of
natural gas in the machine room (on the 14th floor of 1
Embarcadero Center, no less), and (2) a "flood" affecting that
same machine room when a 1.5" water line with 30 stories of
pressure head drained a 10K gallon holding tank under the false
floor.

I was present for a couple of other incidents. One was in a
conferencce room on the 14th floor when the Coalinga 'quake hit.
Most of the rest of the people in the meeting were management and
I was asked why I'd gotten under the table. My reply was that I
did what *corporate* *policy* called for in that situation. They
conceded that I was correct. At a different company where I was
the only non-management presnt (I was brought along as "our"
sides token techie), the data center people asserted that what we
wanted--send data from a ASCII terminal emulator to an EBCDIC
mainframe couldn't be done. So I (innocently) asked why not,
since I'd been doing just that about 5 years earlier at another
company. The data center folks immediately said, "Well, we've
never done it." Fortunately the folks on my side of the table
recognized the difference. A few months later a "new" feature
was rolled out (i.e. they'd recompiled the code that ran the 3705
communications controller to do protocol and character conversions).

On 11/15/22 11:48 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tkkm9e$pc9s$1@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 11/10/2022 2:04 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <tkeglo$cg6$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/8/2022 8:35 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>>> In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>> John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>>>>>>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>>>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>>>>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>>>>>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>>>>>>> for decades.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>>>>>>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>>>>>>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>>>>>>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>>>>>>> interpretation to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>>>>>> boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>>>>>> era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>>>>>> of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>>>>>> we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>>>>>> factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>>>>>> to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>>> I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.
>>>>>
>>>> 911 Dispatch Systems on call programmer here.
>>>
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> So ALL your calls were dire emergencies.
>>
>> Well, all the after hours ones were. I had one weekend where I went to
>> work on Friday, went home at the end of my usual work day and was awake
>> until Monday morning dealing with 50 to 60 priority 1 TSRs (a normal
>> weekend would have half a dozen), THEN had to go in to the office Monday
>> morning because my supervisor had scheduled a meeting with me for
>> immediately after the Monday morning staff meeting without telling me
>> what it was about. I was the first give me report (all projects ahead
>> of schedule, which meant under-budget) and then passed out, having been
>> awake for 72+ hours straight at that point. Someone woke me when the
>> meeting ended, I staggered after my supervisor for our meeting. As soon
>> as we were in his office he told me he had rescheduled it. When we had
>> the meeting a few days later it was to reprimand me for falling asleep
>> in the staff meeting. o_O (Obviously that wasn't the original reason,
>> the real reason was so he could reprimand me for _something_ because the
>> company had new owners and was looking to lower payroll thru
>> "attrition". Even the HR person who was in the meeting with us agreed
>> with my complaint about that and that reprimand didn't go in my file.
>> Of course the supervisor just threw out another BS "reprimand" that I
>> was "too friendly" with the clients' personnel but he weasel worded that
>> enough that HR couldn't throw it out.)
>>
>> Another one. When we got these after hours priority 1 calls the contact
>> was usually a dispatch supervisor or a senior dispatcher. Sometimes it
>> was someone in the agency's IT department. I got the page for this call
>> at 2am on a Sunday morning. Called the given number and the person who
>> answered identified themselves as the Chief of Police for <one of the
>> major west coast cities> and wanted to know why it was that as soon as
>> one of his officers had been shot _my_ system ground to a halt. (No
>> pressure. :P ) I finished connecting in to their system and quickly
>> saw what the problem was. They were overloading their network, too much
>> traffic because too many people were following the incident "live" and
>> they hadn't upgraded their network as we had advised when we installed
>> their system to be able to handle something like that. Called him back,
>> explained what I found and suggested that he have everyone who did NOT
>> have a NEED to be up to the second on the incident close out the window
>> they were following it on and just run a one-time 'query incident
>> history' when they wanted to see what the current situation was. I also
>> said I'd have our network people contact his IT department Monday
>> morning about upgrading their network to our recommended capacity. If
>> the Chief complained it never reached me and all the other programmers
>> agreed with my handling of it.
>>
>> Do I win? :D
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> You win. Thos are certainly far more traumatic incidents than
> anything I ever had to deal with.
>
> While I din't have to *do* anything--other than get out of the
> way--one shop I worked in had (1) an explosive concentration of
> natural gas in the machine room (on the 14th floor of 1
> Embarcadero Center, no less), and (2) a "flood" affecting that
> same machine room when a 1.5" water line with 30 stories of
> pressure head drained a 10K gallon holding tank under the false
> floor.
>
> I was present for a couple of other incidents. One was in a
> conferencce room on the 14th floor when the Coalinga 'quake hit.
> Most of the rest of the people in the meeting were management and
> I was asked why I'd gotten under the table. My reply was that I
> did what *corporate* *policy* called for in that situation. They
> conceded that I was correct. At a different company where I was
> the only non-management presnt (I was brought along as "our"
> sides token techie), the data center people asserted that what we
> wanted--send data from a ASCII terminal emulator to an EBCDIC
> mainframe couldn't be done. So I (innocently) asked why not,
> since I'd been doing just that about 5 years earlier at another
> company. The data center folks immediately said, "Well, we've
> never done it." Fortunately the folks on my side of the table
> recognized the difference. A few months later a "new" feature
> was rolled out (i.e. they'd recompiled the code that ran the 3705
> communications controller to do protocol and character conversions).

Start, raving mad. Ever since the first drop of BTAM, code-translation
was /always/ a feature of telecommunications in the S/360 and its
successors, and even if it hadn’t been, you had to code it in assembler,
so you’d have access to the TR instruction anyway.

--
John W. Kennedy
Algernon Burbage, Lord Roderick, Father Martin, Bishop Baldwin,
King Pellinore, Captain Bailey, Merlin -- A Kingdom for a Stage!

On 11/15/22 08:48, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tkkm9e$pc9s$1@dont-email.me>,

[stuff deleted]

>
> (Hal Heydt)
> You win. Thos are certainly far more traumatic incidents than
> anything I ever had to deal with.
>
> While I din't have to *do* anything--other than get out of the
> way--one shop I worked in had (1) an explosive concentration of
> natural gas in the machine room (on the 14th floor of 1
> Embarcadero Center, no less), and (2) a "flood" affecting that
> same machine room when a 1.5" water line with 30 stories of
> pressure head drained a 10K gallon holding tank under the false
> floor.
>
> I was present for a couple of other incidents. One was in a
> conferencce room on the 14th floor when the Coalinga 'quake hit.
> Most of the rest of the people in the meeting were management and
> I was asked why I'd gotten under the table. My reply was that I
> did what *corporate* *policy* called for in that situation. They
> conceded that I was correct. At a different company where I was
> the only non-management presnt (I was brought along as "our"
> sides token techie), the data center people asserted that what we
> wanted--send data from a ASCII terminal emulator to an EBCDIC
> mainframe couldn't be done. So I (innocently) asked why not,
> since I'd been doing just that about 5 years earlier at another
> company. The data center folks immediately said, "Well, we've
> never done it." Fortunately the folks on my side of the table
> recognized the difference. A few months later a "new" feature
> was rolled out (i.e. they'd recompiled the code that ran the 3705
> communications controller to do protocol and character conversions).

For most of my career, there was no such things as after hours on call,
at least for the software part of my life. Everything was classified and
the facilities locked up after 6 pm or so, and the actual deployed
systems were, um, elsewhere and therefore unavailable without a plane
flight. However, when I worked at NASA/Ames I got a text message at 2:30
AM or so that there was a problem (the mice were getting too hot) on the
ISS and I needed to come in immediately. So I did. The message was
actually generated by our software on the ISS.

My office mate and I simultaneously jumped under our desks for the
Coalinga Quake. It shook pretty good in Mtn. View. For the Loma Prieta
quake the table I was under was trying to walk away. Not fun.

--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Definitely Retired)

On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 16:48:24 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <tkkm9e$pc9s$1@dont-email.me>,
>Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>On 11/10/2022 2:04 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <tkeglo$cg6$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/8/2022 8:35 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>>> In article <FLucnQmw-L_Pj_X-nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>> John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/6/22 2:10 AM, Default User wrote:
>>>>>>> Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>>>>>> Dilbert: Dilbert Quiet Quits
>>>>>>>>> https://dilbert.com/strip/2022-10-22
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Based on a true story.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what the recent rage over quiet quitting is. It is
>>>>>>>> not a new phenomenom. In the Dilbertverse, Wally has done so
>>>>>>>> for decades.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not really. As I understand the concept, it doesn't mean avoiding
>>>>>>> legitimate work or goofing off. Instead, it means that when your time
>>>>>>> at work is done, you are off duty. No answering calls, emails or texts
>>>>>>> at night, weekends, vacations, that sort of thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As is often the case, people hear the term and put their own
>>>>>>> interpretation to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It can easily drift into other things, like not bothering to tell the
>>>>>> boss that he’s just told you to do something impossible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, the whole thing is alien to me, because I’m from the mainframe
>>>>>> era, and, for years, I was the only person who could respond to any sort
>>>>>> of software emergency. If I had to put in 36 hours straight, I had to;
>>>>>> we were a billion-dollar company with only one computer (apart from
>>>>>> factory-floor and laboratory minis), and the billing and the payroll had
>>>>>> to keep rolling or there’d be Hell to pay.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>>> I, too, spent some years as The Programmer On Call.
>>>>>
>>>> 911 Dispatch Systems on call programmer here.
>>>
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> So ALL your calls were dire emergencies.
>>
>>Well, all the after hours ones were. I had one weekend where I went to
>>work on Friday, went home at the end of my usual work day and was awake
>>until Monday morning dealing with 50 to 60 priority 1 TSRs (a normal
>>weekend would have half a dozen), THEN had to go in to the office Monday
>>morning because my supervisor had scheduled a meeting with me for
>>immediately after the Monday morning staff meeting without telling me
>>what it was about. I was the first give me report (all projects ahead
>>of schedule, which meant under-budget) and then passed out, having been
>>awake for 72+ hours straight at that point. Someone woke me when the
>>meeting ended, I staggered after my supervisor for our meeting. As soon
>>as we were in his office he told me he had rescheduled it. When we had
>>the meeting a few days later it was to reprimand me for falling asleep
>>in the staff meeting. o_O (Obviously that wasn't the original reason,
>>the real reason was so he could reprimand me for _something_ because the
>>company had new owners and was looking to lower payroll thru
>>"attrition". Even the HR person who was in the meeting with us agreed
>>with my complaint about that and that reprimand didn't go in my file.
>>Of course the supervisor just threw out another BS "reprimand" that I
>>was "too friendly" with the clients' personnel but he weasel worded that
>>enough that HR couldn't throw it out.)
>>
>>Another one. When we got these after hours priority 1 calls the contact
>>was usually a dispatch supervisor or a senior dispatcher. Sometimes it
>>was someone in the agency's IT department. I got the page for this call
>>at 2am on a Sunday morning. Called the given number and the person who
>>answered identified themselves as the Chief of Police for <one of the
>>major west coast cities> and wanted to know why it was that as soon as
>>one of his officers had been shot _my_ system ground to a halt. (No
>>pressure. :P ) I finished connecting in to their system and quickly
>>saw what the problem was. They were overloading their network, too much
>>traffic because too many people were following the incident "live" and
>>they hadn't upgraded their network as we had advised when we installed
>>their system to be able to handle something like that. Called him back,
>>explained what I found and suggested that he have everyone who did NOT
>>have a NEED to be up to the second on the incident close out the window
>>they were following it on and just run a one-time 'query incident
>>history' when they wanted to see what the current situation was. I also
>>said I'd have our network people contact his IT department Monday
>>morning about upgrading their network to our recommended capacity. If
>>the Chief complained it never reached me and all the other programmers
>>agreed with my handling of it.
>>
>>Do I win? :D
>
>(Hal Heydt)
>You win. Thos are certainly far more traumatic incidents than
>anything I ever had to deal with.
>
>While I din't have to *do* anything--other than get out of the
>way--one shop I worked in had (1) an explosive concentration of
>natural gas in the machine room (on the 14th floor of 1
>Embarcadero Center, no less), and (2) a "flood" affecting that
>same machine room when a 1.5" water line with 30 stories of
>pressure head drained a 10K gallon holding tank under the false
>floor.
>
>I was present for a couple of other incidents. One was in a
>conferencce room on the 14th floor when the Coalinga 'quake hit.
>Most of the rest of the people in the meeting were management and
>I was asked why I'd gotten under the table. My reply was that I
>did what *corporate* *policy* called for in that situation. They
>conceded that I was correct. At a different company where I was
>the only non-management presnt (I was brought along as "our"
>sides token techie), the data center people asserted that what we
>wanted--send data from a ASCII terminal emulator to an EBCDIC
>mainframe couldn't be done. So I (innocently) asked why not,
>since I'd been doing just that about 5 years earlier at another
>company. The data center folks immediately said, "Well, we've
>never done it." Fortunately the folks on my side of the table
>recognized the difference. A few months later a "new" feature
>was rolled out (i.e. they'd recompiled the code that ran the 3705
>communications controller to do protocol and character conversions).

Reminds me of an incident where my boss wanted to use his PC to deal
with reports generated by the minicomputer. The Official Programmer
response was (roughly) "PCs use ASCII, we use FORTRAN". Which, of
course, makes no sense at all. Morons.

We used a terminal program to access and save the data
screen-by-screen, and some contraption my boss came up with to push
the appropriate key to get the next screen so he didn't have to. Then
we applied a Clipper (a dBase compiler) program to parse the records
and extract the data piece-by-piece. And it worked!

Years later, I ran into him at a bookstore while he was preparing for
his retirement, and he told me that, after I left, the Official
Programmers had changed the format of the data -- but my code was so
clear that, at least for a while, he was able to adapt it to the
changes. Even though he wasn't a programmer, even an amateur one like
myself.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."