January 29, 2019 at 8:52 am
Re: The editorial
It's interesting to ask us to perhaps behave or choose in ways that get along with or go along with the flow of wherever we are, but I'd argue that it's sometimes hard to say "what's right"? Did the college deliberately allow paths to grow or are they annoyed people are cutting across grounds and wearing away grasses?
Is the right thing to not pull forward when you're on the left, or are you unconsciously reacting thinking the person making the right turn saw something you didn't or knows the light is changing?
"Right" is often a bit nebulous.
Re: comments
You can certainly note that you don't like a piece. I've had plenty of items that people didn't like or were offended by. That's fine. I do think you can professionally and respectfully state that. While Geoff's comment is fine, it's a little rude. The displeasure could be stated a bit better.
January 29, 2019 at 9:07 am
patrickmcginnis59 10839 - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 8:10 AMJeff Moden - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 7:09 AMI'm just curious especially since it's on a favorite topic of yours... what is it that didn't you like about the editorial?
I didn't learn anything about technological mistakes from the editorial. Pretty much just agreeing with Geoff with the additional caveat that I would have been really interested reading about mistakes that were generalized to IT and technology even if not specific to SQL server. Even with themes of personal qualities, all I get is suggestions to be a better person, but isn't that sort of preaching like Geoff says? Don't people commonly want to be better? What about the people who don't? Is this editorial going to change their minds?
I myself have posted content that other people didn't like. It happens and I read about it from post responses. How about lets cowboy up and appreciate people care enough to mention their disappointment and hope for better things in the future. If all you guys want is cheerleading and rainbows out of everybody's rear bumpers, message Steve and I'm sure he'll accommodate you, maybe by removing some posts to ensure the internet measures up to your lofty standards.
Oh... I not only don't mind disagreement but encourage it because a whole lot of ideas can spring up. As with Steve, I just think Geoff's comment was rude, especially the "preacher" part. That's one of those passive-aggressive ad hominem attack remarks that attacks the author with little substance.
I also thought it quite entertaining that Geoff made the comment about not learning anything about SQL Server from it since most of his replies follow the same suit. It was nothing but an unfounded attack.
My take on the article is that it very much applies to people using SQL Server in a whole lot of different ways. The idea of paths forming covers the whole gambit of programming adventures from people having a better idea to people following the crowd to people just being lazy to other people putting up artificial barriers, etc. etc.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 29, 2019 at 9:07 am
Grant Fritchey - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 8:06 AMGeoff.Sturdy - Monday, January 28, 2019 8:21 AMSo what did I learn today from this post ? absolutely nothing about SQL server , and it that doesn't take a preacher to preach .It's an editorial. They're not usually lessons about SQL Server (although they can be). A lot of my editorials are also life lessons, thoughts about history, stuff like that. There's more to the job than just the tech. We really do have to learn and practice being better people to become better at our jobs. This is because our jobs are not done in isolation. The old saw that DBAs should be treated like mushrooms, kept in a dark room and fed ****, is garbage. It's always been a cooperative, interactive, people-oriented job. That requires people skills, which have to be worked on with equal fervor to learning how to test backups.
I think the implication here is that theres a lesson to be learned from the editorial and that some readers are missing it. Lets hear a one line summary!
January 29, 2019 at 10:10 am
Jeff Moden - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 9:07 AMOh... I not only don't mind disagreement but encourage it because a whole lot of ideas can spring up. As with Steve, I just think Geoff's comment was rude, especially the "preacher" part. That's one of those passive-aggressive ad hominem attack remarks that attacks the author with little substance.I also thought it quite entertaining that Geoff made the comment about not learning anything about SQL Server from it since most of his replies follow the same suit. It was nothing but an unfounded attack.
My take on the article is that it very much applies to people using SQL Server in a whole lot of different ways. The idea of paths forming covers the whole gambit of programming adventures from people having a better idea to people following the crowd to people just being lazy to other people putting up artificial barriers, etc. etc.
I'm still looking for Geoff's editorials, Steve can you help out here?
I'll skip the "tone" bit.
Help me with a one sentence summary of the editorial. So far I'm getting "don't be lazy and crooked." Well that "tone" certainly is less than generous! Hopefully Grant might offer up a summary too, he may have something that will help me see what I missed.
January 29, 2019 at 10:12 am
patrickmcginnis59 10839 - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 10:10 AMJeff Moden - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 9:07 AMpatrickmcginnis59 10839 - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 8:10 AMJeff Moden - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 7:09 AMI'm just curious especially since it's on a favorite topic of yours... what is it that didn't you like about the editorial?
I didn't learn anything about technological mistakes from the editorial. Pretty much just agreeing with Geoff with the additional caveat that I would have been really interested reading about mistakes that were generalized to IT and technology even if not specific to SQL server. Even with themes of personal qualities, all I get is suggestions to be a better person, but isn't that sort of preaching like Geoff says? Don't people commonly want to be better? What about the people who don't? Is this editorial going to change their minds?
I myself have posted content that other people didn't like. It happens and I read about it from post responses. How about lets cowboy up and appreciate people care enough to mention their disappointment and hope for better things in the future. If all you guys want is cheerleading and rainbows out of everybody's rear bumpers, message Steve and I'm sure he'll accommodate you, maybe by removing some posts to ensure the internet measures up to your lofty standards.
Oh... I not only don't mind disagreement but encourage it because a whole lot of ideas can spring up. As with Steve, I just think Geoff's comment was rude, especially the "preacher" part. That's one of those passive-aggressive ad hominem attack remarks that attacks the author with little substance.
I also thought it quite entertaining that Geoff made the comment about not learning anything about SQL Server from it since most of his replies follow the same suit. It was nothing but an unfounded attack.
My take on the article is that it very much applies to people using SQL Server in a whole lot of different ways. The idea of paths forming covers the whole gambit of programming adventures from people having a better idea to people following the crowd to people just being lazy to other people putting up artificial barriers, etc. etc.
I'm still looking for Geoff's editorials, Steve can you help out here?
I'll skip the "tone" bit.
Help me with a one sentence summary of the editorial. So far I'm getting "don't be lazy and crooked." Well that "tone" certainly is less than generous! Hopefully Grant might offer up a summary too, he may have something that will help me see what I missed.
No editorials, Patrick. Replies.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 29, 2019 at 10:14 am
Jeff Moden - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 10:12 AMNo editorials, Patrick. Replies.
Gotcha. So if he had the stack of replies you do, his "tone" would be ok?
edit: ok I made a mistake and failed to skip the "tone" bit 😀
January 29, 2019 at 2:55 pm
I think your tone, Patrick, was fine. I didn't like it, it didn't relate to me, would have preferred x or y. That's great.
Leaving a comment like "So what did I learn today from this post ? absolutely nothing about SQL server , and it that doesn't take a preacher to preach ." isn't helpful. This is a little sarcastic or passive aggressive.
I would have thought this would be better, even with a not so great tone
"This wasn't a good editorial. It didn't relate to SQL Server or my job, and it feels like a preacher preaching to me. I didn't appreciate reading this today"
That let's me know what you didn't like, and a little bit of why. Disagreements are good. I wouldn't expect everyone to like things I write, nor Kathi. What I would appreciate, and what adds to the discussion is some constructive criticism. Drive by trolling comments are not helpful, and they seem to violate what I try to do in these discussions: be the same or a better version of myself.
Few people do that and the short comments without context or body language usually mean a worse version of ourselves is being presented.
January 29, 2019 at 3:02 pm
Interesting that the comment section on this post has basically become a more detailed example of the article itself with demonstrations of both sides of the human condition on display. 😀
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
January 29, 2019 at 3:23 pm
Sean Lange - Tuesday, January 29, 2019 3:02 PMInteresting that the comment section on this post has basically become a more detailed example of the article itself with demonstrations of both sides of the human condition on display. 😀
Ok then, who needs to confess to mistakes 🙂
January 29, 2019 at 6:41 pm
I started to write a comment and somehow managed to hit the tab key which blew it all away so now I have to start again. In this period of restarting, I noticed that there was a comment that the article was useless because the person didn't learn anything related to SQL Server.
There is more to being a good DBA than just having technical knowledge of the engine and how to fix things.
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
January 29, 2019 at 10:31 pm
This article was very interesting for me from the angle that I am in a role which makes me the Technical Lead for database problem-solving as well as indicating where and how we need to head when faced with various issues. Every person in the team are DBAs and there is a requirement for strategy in handling hundreds of instances that are lacking in many different ways.
I am still very technical in my role and I often need to make the kind of decisions that require the right thing to be done but can put you out of lockstep with the management and HR types that don't understand technical issues and regard legislation and ethical behaviour as purely optional for themselves.
I have been toying with writing an article relating to this subject for quite some time but there is the nagging thought of 'CLM' (Career Limiting Move) that goes with it. Maybe my next employer is not interested in someone who does the right thing? Is honesty and integrity an unnecessary commodity?
This may sound a bit strange for a topic reply but I am deeply concerned about this issue... I have been in the situation where things started to go south with one employer when I informed the Team Leader (in the earshot of management) that charging a client for time worked when it was spent in unrelated meetings was fraud. Another time I was reprimanded - as having refused to do my work - for indicating that performing that particular task would put the organisation in breach of contract and that it should be run by the legal department first.
To compound the issue, I am also a Justice of the Peace; so, ignoring the law once I become aware of a situation is not something that is an option when I am responsible for both people and data. The example needs to be set and shown to be consistent for all because, as a DBA, your integrity needs to be beyond reproach when you consider the data and potential secrecy that goes with what may be contained.
I was informed a few weeks ago that, when it comes to corporate executives, they are well-versed in the law and what they are able to do and where they can make decisions that stay within those bounds. They are also supposed to be well aware of company policies - especially the ones that are derived from Commonwealth Law.
I say that this is utter garbage and that a significant portion of Directors, Senior Directors, Executive Directors, Operations Managers & CIO/CFO/CTO/COO/CEO-level people are quite oblivious to the law because they are used to *being* the law in an organisation and nobody questions them or requires them to put anything in writing. If they are requested to put something into writing, you may find your job being threatened right before your eyes. There's a good reason why they say that you have to be a sociopath to be a good Chief {something} Officer.
Have you ever noticed the ever-present posters in an office saying that if you see fraud or corruption that you are to report it? They are usually everywhere and I've not seen a site in 15 years that didn't have them.
The problem with this is that HR are the ones that expect you to report the issues to them - but the paradox is that HR exists to protect a business and not the employees.
How do you report an executive when the person receiving the report answers to the executive?
HR has a higher level of allegiance to the management that endorses them than the employees who create work for them. I have developed a major distrust in HR people because they are often either uninformed on both policy and law and advise management with guesswork - or wilfully and intentionally disregard sections of policy (and legislation) to achieve a goal.
As an example that happens frequently... As a DBA you will notice someone has a level of authority that greatly exceeds that which a person needs to perform their job. If you ask them about it, you're told that they need it but usually cannot say why. If you revoke it, they will usually send it up the management chain on their side of the business and then it will free-fall down the other side, whereupon you are instructed to grant the authority and are not to engage in such actions.
What is the right thing to do? Where do you go from here? You have clearly indicated that there is a potential security breach as well as a policy breach which, again, is derived from government policy and, as advised by a Security Expert, Commonwealth Law.
Can you imagine what would happen if there was a data breach or if the media just became aware of the insufficient security methods?
Can you imagine what happens when the media finds out and it makes it to a minister in parliament?
Would the executives or HR rush to your aid?
So... something I have been working on lately is the definition of corruption (this is Queensland in Australia):
Definition of Corruption
Legal definition of corrupt conduct
Under section 15 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 corrupt conduct means conduct of a person, regardless of whether the person holds or held an appointment, that –
(a) adversely affects, or could adversely affect, directly or indirectly, the performance of functions or the exercise of powers of –
(i) a unit of public administration; or
(ii) a person holding an appointment; and
(b) results, or could result, directly or indirectly, in the performance of functions or the exercise of powers mentioned in paragraph (a) in a way that –
(i) is not honest or is not impartial; or
(ii) involves a breach of the trust placed in a person holding an appointment either knowingly or recklessly; or
(iii) involves a misuse of information or material acquired in or in connection with the performance of functions or the exercise of powers of a person holding an appointment; and
(c) is engaged in for the purpose of providing a benefit to the person or another person or causing a detriment to another person; and
(d) would, if proved, be –
(i) a criminal offence; or
(ii) a disciplinary breach providing reasonable grounds for terminating the person’s services, if the person is or were the holder of an appointment.
The above is something that should be read by/read to every person who holds an executive position. It clearly indicates that executives are not exempt and that, while they might make the rules in an organisation, they do not have the option to ignore the law - or to force anyone else to ignore it for any reason whatsoever. The sooner that a few big names get taken away in handcuffs, the better this situation might become.
As a DBA, I say that if the request doesn't seem right - that the smell test just is a little off (think of it in terms of how the local major media outlet would regard the incident if they got wind of it) - then get it in writing and store that information offsite.
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
January 30, 2019 at 5:06 am
To compound the issue, I am also a Justice of the Peace; so, ignoring the law once I become aware of a situation is not something that is an option when I am responsible for both people and data. The example needs to be set and shown to be consistent for all because, as a DBA, your integrity needs to be beyond reproach when you consider the data and potential secrecy that goes with what may be contained.
What job positions do you believe don't require integrity? I can't precisely tell from your post whether you believe a DBA has more obligations to respect the law than CEO's, CFO's etc, on the one hand you're hinting that being a DBA has some requirements regarding integrity, but on the other hand you seem to indicate that the other positions mentioned aren't exempt either.
Anyways I do really regret reading this editorial and resulting posts, I should have "done the right thing" and read some webcomics instead.
January 31, 2019 at 3:09 pm
patrickmcginnis59 10839 - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 5:06 AMWhat job positions do you believe don't require integrity? I can't precisely tell from your post whether you believe a DBA has more obligations to respect the law than CEO's, CFO's etc, on the one hand you're hinting that being a DBA has some requirements regarding integrity, but on the other hand you seem to indicate that the other positions mentioned aren't exempt either.Anyways I do really regret reading this editorial and resulting posts, I should have "done the right thing" and read some webcomics instead.
You might be able to "... tell precisely..." what I believe, but what you have told yourself is incorrect. I might be able to tell myself precisely where you come from and where your position lies with respect to being a DBA but it would be my opinion and probably not fact.
A DBA doesn't have more obligations to respect the law than anyone else. What happens in reality is that a good DBA *will* respect the law more often than not but they are also the first ones accused if there is a breach and the first ones that the auditors work on to remove authorities. Executives, from the many sites that I have operated at and because of their position within the company, they become oblivious to their legal obligations - if they chose to be aware of them in the first place. By and large, Executives prove themselves to lack integrity and respect for anything other than their peers and the next position to which they want to apply.
If you haven't been on the receiving end of an executive with some hair-brained "logic" and corruption of logic pertaining to corporate policies and how they apply and to whom they apply, then I'd be suggesting that you have indeed been fortunate in your career.
I agree about the web-comics though. I'd much rather read some old editions in preference to many of the forums.
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
January 31, 2019 at 10:31 pm
SQL51F1 - Thursday, January 31, 2019 3:09 PMpatrickmcginnis59 10839 - Wednesday, January 30, 2019 5:06 AMWhat job positions do you believe don't require integrity? I can't precisely tell from your post whether you believe a DBA has more obligations to respect the law than CEO's, CFO's etc, on the one hand you're hinting that being a DBA has some requirements regarding integrity, but on the other hand you seem to indicate that the other positions mentioned aren't exempt either.Anyways I do really regret reading this editorial and resulting posts, I should have "done the right thing" and read some webcomics instead.
You might be able to "... tell precisely..." what I believe, but what you have told yourself is incorrect. I might be able to tell myself precisely where you come from and where your position lies with respect to being a DBA but it would be my opinion and probably not fact.
A DBA doesn't have more obligations to respect the law than anyone else. What happens in reality is that a good DBA *will* respect the law more often than not but they are also the first ones accused if there is a breach and the first ones that the auditors work on to remove authorities. Executives, from the many sites that I have operated at and because of their position within the company, they become oblivious to their legal obligations - if they chose to be aware of them in the first place. By and large, Executives prove themselves to lack integrity and respect for anything other than their peers and the next position to which they want to apply.
If you haven't been on the receiving end of an executive with some hair-brained "logic" and corruption of logic pertaining to corporate policies and how they apply and to whom they apply, then I'd be suggesting that you have indeed been fortunate in your career.
I agree about the web-comics though. I'd much rather read some old editions in preference to many of the forums.
I think I see what you're saying, but I don't know if I'd parse it down quite that much, you're delving into legalese which in your case is expected, you're a legal sort of guy and all. I can't help thinking that in some ways especially considering your situation, maybe we should say continuing as a DBA might actually requires you to surrender your integrity. Keeping your integrity might mean leaving this job.
It might be too subjective for me, thats why I like to generalize that society should require integrity for all parties involved, once you drop any requirement for any individual to possess integrity, you get all these contradictions and interpretations, like you yourself having to pay a personal cost to maintain your own integrity in the face of the CEO's lack of the same.
Viewing 14 posts - 16 through 28 (of 28 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply