Brian Mathis wrote:
> This thread seriously highlights the sort of attitudes that are
> causing major issues in IT in general, and have been for years.
> Whenever someone makes a mistake, we point fingers and call them
> stupid. We haughtily proclaim that only people who "know what they
> are doing" should have a job -- as if we had never been short on time,
> ventured into an area outside our expertise, or been a beginner.
>
> The fact is that we all have a million things to do and only a fixed
> amount of time. It's simply not possible for anyone to be a complete
> expert in everything at all times. We've all been in a position where
> something needs to be done immediately and you don't know everything
> about the product/system. I would wager that is more common than the
> situation where you know everything about everything before performing
> any actions.
>
>
> Additionally, IT often has the unique benefit that users can quickly
> contribute to a feedback loop that informs you directly with what they
> are having trouble with. Other industries, such as advertising,
> marketing, sales, etc... would *kill* to have that sort of feedback.
>
> And what do we do with it? In this case, someone has effectively
> filed a bug on the documentation, and all we can do is spew about how
> stupid the person is. It doesn't matter if the information is there
> /somewhere/; the bug is that it's not clear, or it's presented in a
> confusing way, or it is potentially dangerous and that danger can be
> easily mitigated (Jason Pyeron has got the right idea).
>
Hmmm, not sure I agree with you here. Where I work, and in most places
I've seen, if someone isn't competent enough on the Linux command line,
he/she doesn't get close to a production system until he/she is taught
or learned enough to be trusted.
A company just doesn't turn someone free on Linux servers with root
access if he/she doesn't know what they are doing. That is just plain
stupidity.
Your argument does apply, however, to this thread, the original poster
suggested that the author of the article was wrong, and should be more
clear about his commands. When in fact, the very first sentence of the
article stated it was for *install time* which to me is pretty clear and
concise.
If you have employees working for you and they don't know or understand
enough to know that when you install an OS, it's going to wipe the
drives, then I'd be doing one of two things. 1) teaching my employees,
or 2) not allowing them access to a production system of all things.
Yes, education is important, very important. But the issue with this
thread wasn't about that. It was about someone stating that the author
of an article was wrong or not clear enough on instructions, when in my
opinion, the author was extremely clear with the very first sentence of
the guide.
If I don't know something about a system or piece of software, I set up
a test server at work and play with it. I certainly don't play with it
on a production environment, mis-read or not read at all the guide I'm
working with, and then go back and try to blame the author.
> Instead of taking the lazy approach of dismissing someone as stupid,
> prove that your haughtiness is justified by engaging on how to fix the
> problem. You've been presented with an opportunity to make something
> better than it was before. Take it.
Aside from some sarcasm, no one was being arrogant or rude in their
responses. What problem? The problem that someone didn't clearly read
through the how to before they started typing commands? How is that
anyone's fault here on the list or on the wiki? It's no one's fault
except the person typing things they clearly haven't thought about.
I think everyone's comments are spot on. You don't let people who aren't
educated onto an installation with root access. If that's how you run
your shops, then so be it, but that's not normal in my experience.
Regards,
Max
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
