Subject:
|
Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:06:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
770 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, jsproat@geocities.com (Sproaticus) writes:
> Events in the past few months has led up to the point where several
> typically cool-headed individuals have blown their tops.
I don't know about the others, but I made it a logical decision to blow my
top. It wasn't accidental.
> All this anger and frustration is aimed at one individual in particular,
> and is counter-productive.
>
> Recent lambasting of Mr. Johnathan Wilson has proven to be no good, and
> I am convinced that further beratement would only lead to an increased
> level of frustration and anxiety. These kind of tensions can only hinder
> progress on the LDraw project.
If it becomes clear that the heat wasn't turned up high enough to have the
right effect, I agree with you.
> My participation in this collective anger has caused me to
> delve into some serious soul-searching.
>
> Consider: The debate is over a computer tool for a children's toy. True,
> Legos can become quite a powerful medium of expression in the right hands,
> and it's doubtful that a real child would seriously use LDraw, but the
> basic premise remains. This is about having fun.
It's about a lot of things. It's about fun, toys, colorful pictures, all
that, but it's also about hubris, sociology, psychology, work ethics,
camaraderie, competitiveness, community, and many other by-products of a
wide demographic.
> Doesn't the word Lego derive from "play well"? Isn't this advice that
> we all need to heed, this author included? I'm not saying that excellence
> should be sacrificed to appease a select few. But we pollute the project
> to continue James' work by continuing in these personal attacks.
But it just might be the case that the right mixture of constructive
feedback/criticism and public personal attacks is what it actually takes to
fix the problem. On the other hand, someone who is not motivated by egoboo
or peer pressure will not respond to public criticisms. The right buttons
to push may not yet have been found.
> There are better ways of handling the situation. If the noise level is
> a problem, then remove the source of the noise until it subsides.
Well, it would be best if the source of the noise decided to remove itself,
but should it become necessary (in a popular opinion) to displant the source
of the noise, it could theoretically be done.
> If Mr.
> Wilson's working patterns are a problem, then we need to either reject his
> work with a simple "no", or help to improve his work, or both.
In an ideal world, that would work. And even in this un-ideal world we live
in, that works with many types of people. Unfortunately, it doesn't work
with all types of people. No amount of coaching can correct for a bad
attitude. Only one who wants to improve can improve.
On the job, what happens when you have a difficult employee is you work with
them carefully and patiently to help them improve their methods and/or their
output. You pair them with a good mentor or work them directly, as
appropriate. You talk about what it is you want to improve, and work toward
that together. If things don't improve after a few months (or whatever
timeframe makes sense), you cut your losses and move them to another group
where there may be a better skills fit or personality fit. If that still
doesn't work out (after n iterations, n>1), then you agree that things still
aren't working out, you terminate employment. (Hopefully you have already
taken preemptive steps to find and cross-train a replacement).
End of story. Pretty brutal, but I don't see why volunteer-collaborative
projects should be any different. With something like LDraw, there is no
single leader, no coach, no boss -- but even in the absence of one, it
should be clear to all when one of the horses is slowing down the chariot.
It's better to cut loose that 1 lame horse and run with N-1 horses than to
continue running with N horses.
It's also true that a team of 4 great workers can do more -- and better --
work than a team of 20 average workers, especially so in the information
sciences. (Of course it's not the worker himself/herself who is "great" or
"average" but the *fit* between the worker and the task.)
> But the way we
> have reacted indicates that Mr. Wilson has some control over our actions.
> This is not the case. We need to find a solution, and fast, before this
> forum turns into a needless flame war. We don't all need to be friends,
> but we can sure be a hell of a lot more friendly.
All right, I'm going to cool my jets on this and sit back and see what
happens.
> There is little more I can say on the matter. I am not a parts author,
> nor do I aspire to become one, so I cannot help much
Nor am I, so I don't feel 100% comfortable flaming anyone about parts.
I do know a thing or two about working through bad attitudes, however,
so I hope the end result of my interaction is more positive than negative.
I do understand that the short-term effect is definitely negative, and I
humbly apologize for that.
> I am ashamed of the spiteful feelings which I felt that I had to
> express.
Don't be ashamed; it's not your fault. And thank you for speaking up rather
than harboring such feelings.
> Therefore, the best action I can take on the matter is to ignore
> Mr. Wilson. I will endeavor to do this, and I implore you to do the
> same.
Well, I can't (won't) ignore him, but I'll try to sit more along the
sidelines on this, where I really belong. All of this is not a good use
of my time.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A tiresome tirade (Was: garbage output)
|
| (...) I blew my top after carefully thinking about it and noting that others seemed to be unwilling or too nice to blow theirs. The e-mail I received from several people after that agreeing with what I said makes me think it was a Good Thing to do. (...) (26 years ago, 11-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
