Low life admins - Unix

This is a discussion on Low life admins - Unix ; 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 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Low life admins

  1. Low life admins

    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 ass!

    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



  2. Re: Low life admins

    In article ,
    "OICU812" 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 ass!
    >
    > 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...




  3. Re: Low life admins

    On Mon, 16 May 2005 21:05:49 -0700, OICU812 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 ass!


    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?


  4. Re: Low life admins

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


    "OICU812" 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 ass!
    >
    > 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
    >
    >




  5. Re: Low life admins

    In article <3eufneF52nk5U1@individual.net>, Dave Hinz wrote:
    >On Mon, 16 May 2005 21:05:49 -0700, OICU812 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 ass, you may safely ignore him.

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

    >> 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.


    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.

    >> 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_.


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

    >> I imagine they're the same one's that leave the workplace to go home and
    >> spread viruses and spam.

    >
    >I doubt that.


    Did you check this clowns headers?

    >>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437


    Whatever.

    Old guy

  6. Re: Low life admins


    Dave Hinz wrote:
    > > Opinions?

    >
    > 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/tec...rticleid=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


  7. Re: Low life admins

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

    > Dave Hinz wrote:
    > > > Opinions?

    > >
    > > 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/tec...rticleid=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...




+ Reply to Thread