Lately I am seeing attestation forms in the projects I am working in wherein the contents are split across multiple checkboxes followed by a submit button. The beef I have is that the submit button will only be valid/enabled if all checkboxes are set to checked/true.
The problem with this approach is that it gives the wrong perception that you can say I dont agree to one or more of the provided options and you can still proceed. I assume the intent was to increase the possibility that the reader goes through each line but this is still bad form. The assumed intent does not guarantee that readers actually read the lines. All this does is increase the frustration of doing 5 more unnecessary clicks to the form.
If it was up to me, I will just list down the lines and then just put a checkbox at the bottom that states that the reader confirms to reading all the lines and agrees to follow them. It bears the same weight and legality, with 5 lesser clicks.
This is part of the “Posts from the Graveyard” which are emails I have sent to my then team or project. I am reposting them here for future reference before I finally delete them from my inbox.
The email was originally sent on August 1, 2014.
Team,
I am not sure if you have come across these little idioms and quotations but these should be apt for what we do:
A stitch in time saves nine.
Knowing just enough to be dangerous.
A fool with a tool is still a fool. [albeit a dangerous fool]
The gist is please understand what we are doing. Do not be complacent in submitting something because it will pass mechanical validation; it should pass the validation of another sentient being like yourself who actually know what is the purpose of the item being validated. Aim to craft and submit something because it is good enough that you wont be embarrassed to say “I created that stuff, marvel at how good it is. That is the <insert-your-name> mark of craftsmanship.” It was mentioned yesterday to complete forms by providing information that is actually useful. The challenge is applying that mentality to every little bit of thing that goes out of your plate. Will you be amenable to buying something that is sub-par with the amount that you are paying? Of course you want something that is of equal or greater value. It should be the same way when we are the ones handling the production side of the equation.
I am not stingy when it comes to sharing knowledge. I always say to my team members that I have a 3-strike (or 3 chances) rule when discussing a topic and mentoring at work. Anyone can ask me anything tech-related, soft-skill , or maximizing a loophole three times and I will gladly do it.
I will discuss a topic the first time, normally with fervor if its an interesting topic.
I will discuss the topic the second time because the concepts may not have been clear or entirely alien to the target audience such that details wasn’t properly absorbed the first time.
I will discuss the topic for the third and final time, because I may not be explaining it properly or the “recipient” was not really paying attention.
There is no fourth time. If there is a need for a fourth discussion then it means we have a problem.
[Lifted from an old email I sent to my previous project mates.]
This is an email to remind about wantonly tweaking configuration settings in the Oracle Fusion Middleware stack to make the code work. Wantonly in this case means it did not go through the official change management process as the members in question wanted to quickly solve an issue that was first encountered in the UAT environment.
E2 is supposed to mirror the E3 environment to catch any problem that could happen in E3, or replicate an ongoing issue.
Our goal is not to make our deliverables pass UAT, but to provide deliverables that will not malfunction in production.
Any setting that needs to be changed needs to be evaluated properly to ensure it doesn’t affect the other applications in the environment. Each setting change is always a compromise between two conflicting scenarios (e.g. performance vs scalability, traceability vs resource management, etc.). We need to understand what we are exchanging for each setting update. The E2 settings change needs to be propagated to E3 afterwards.
You probably have heard of “when life gives you lemons, make lemonade” or “you cannot make omelette without cracking eggs” but company business optimism is taking this a bit further. They are thinking ahead and in what I would assume to be pursuit of cost cutting the powers that be has shifted to “why bother making lemonades and omelette in the first place? let us take away the lemons and eggs so you wont have that problem” mentality.
Ingenious, yes.
Devilish, yes.
Practical? It depends on whose perspective.
I like lemonade and omelette. I also like having the choice whether I will or I will not have them.
I am cleaning up my work inbox to free up some space and came across an email from the “enthusiastic” events committee of the UPEM team. This was about the awards they give out during the year-end party. Guess which one is perennially mine. 🙂
Banksy Award – lives up freedom of expression via whiteboard graffiti
Bleep Award – for having the most “colorful” vocabulary in the team
Bully Award – do we even have to define this?
Caffeine Addict Award – for someone who drinks the most coffee in a day even if not collecting stickers for a Starbucks Planner
Call of Duty: Ghost Ops – for the one who stays longer than our core hours to fulfill duties
Could Have Been Sweethearts – their chemistry is palpable that in another time, place, and lifetime they could have been… We can rename this to Popoy and Basha Award? May second chance! =))
Duct Tape Award – for being able to fix issues, resourcefully
Early Bird Award – for consistently being early in the office
Fitness First Award – for someone who hits the gym regularly
Food Basket Award – for being a saint in providing nutrition to the team
Human Vulture Award – for eating anything found lying around
Iron Chef Award – for the person who always packs a delicious looking lunch while everyone else gets Ministop’s Nuclear Chicken
Keep Calm and Carry On Award – for being calm, cool, and collected on the highest severity of issues
Man of Steel Award – for being thoroughly dedicated to his work that no disaster can stop him . This is given to the teammate who had no or the least number of SL’s/EL’s for the year.
Megaphone Award – for actively voicing out (sometimes louder than necessary) his opinions to the team
Most Bromantic Couple – for living up The Bro Code
Mr./Ms.Seenzone Award – for someone who turns the Lync taskbar icon into a blinking light, and prefers the old fashioned way of one on one interaction
Neatest Nook Award – for having the cleanest cube in the office
One More Thing Award – most likely to extend meetings
Papa/Mama Bear Award – for someone who takes care of the team
Pig Pen Award – for someone who has the messiest cube in the office
Six-pack Award – for someone so funny, he can give you a six-pack just by laughing
Social Butterfly Award – for someone you are always up to date with due to his/her social media posts
Stuck Thread King/Queen – for consistently causing downtime in any of our environments
TMNT Award – for the one who demonstrates proficiency and skill in the art of stealth
UPEM Fashionista (female) – for consistently dressing extraordinary in an ordinary day in the office
UPEM Fashionisto (male) – for consistently dressing extraordinary in an ordinary day in the office
SLA – the maximum amount of time that a task can be put off that the requester cannot contest except to raise the cost by involving higher-paid individuals to increase the imaginary priority shown to external users.
Sometimes misunderstood to be the time needed to require work to be completed.
If you are doing support work and using a ticketing system that doesn’t provide a link or information to contact the administrators then you become responsible for connecting that request to the administrators. You cannot expect end users who are twice-removed from the administrator team to have the means to contact them directly. The very least you can do is to ensure the concerns are forwarded to the next link in the chain and avoid shoving the end user to fumingly face a brick wall when they are given the curt response of “it is not my scope”.
RSS
