|
I understand that I suppose. But I certainly don't agree...
I won't deny that I used to think the same way. Guess I've just moved on from worrying about trivial issues like that...
Its less like re-arranging furnature, and instead like purchasing furnature that you told me you were planning to get. Maybe its not the color you specifically had in mind, but I made sure not to get a vibrant hot pink at least  , and you can always throw it out when you find something better.
I didn't do what I did because I disliked it, I did it because I needed it done. It wasn't a matter of ego or personal taste, it was a matter of necessity.
Seems a bit silly to have to approach it with an 'on eggshells' mindset... But I guess that's what I'll have to do.
Suppose it's easier to change myself than it is to change the world.
|
|
|
|
|
On a project where people are volunteering their time (and I could make the same argument for employees as well, BTW, but it's particularly true of volunteerism) the mistake you guys made was right out of the gate -- setting boundaries. It's a lot more efficient and fun if you all just define the tasks but let the boundaries be really flexible, so that if someone becomes busy, someone else can pick up the slack. That way, everyone feels that they can contribute in meaningful ways and there's a sense of momentum. Conversely, what you all set up was a situation of domino-failure -- when someone can't do what they said they were going to do, they feel bad, and that makes it harder to continue contributing. Plus, the artificial boundaries makes it impossible for someone to contribute something, anything, even if it's adding some comments to someone else's code, and feeling like they are still contributing.
That's my 2c.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I have to say I agree with all of this. I think pretty much everything described here had occurred at some point.
I never understood what the point was behind limiting ourselves to only 'section A' or 'section B'. I think the reason was some acute egotism or maybe self consciousness. They wanted a guarenteed way to say 'I was wholey responsible for X!' and given the nature of the project, the timeframe, and our work ethic, it was entirely counter productive.
The way I see it, the existance of the completed product is proof enough of all of our hard work, no matter how big or small.
I think the next time around, I'll make this point clear from the start; There was no sense in limiting ourselves and each other given our size and situation. It only led to problems...
Everyone's name is still written in the same size font in the end.
|
|
|
|
|
rvIceB wrote: I think the next time around, I'll make this point clear from the start; There was no sense in limiting ourselves and each other given our size and situation. It only led to problems...
Well, I look forward to hearing about a success! And thanks for the feedback, I'm glad it spoke to you.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Read all of the other comments first before commenting.
I think part of the problem is different perspectives of the same phrase:
rvIceB wrote: would span a month's worth of work
Does that mean the project must be completed one calendar month from the start or each person is expected to put in the hours equivalent to one month's work?
It may seem trivial, but defining expectations up front with people is important. And, if a number of them were in the middle of 'life' events (oil field, finishing college, etc), then how much time could they realistically put into the project in a calendar month?
Just my thoughts,
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Poor project management.
rvIceB wrote: who would be primarily 'responsible' for completing certain aspects of the project
That is not a good idea. I think you have found a good reason why it isn't. Tasks aren't assigned to developers before-hand; when a developer is ready to start a new task he takes ownership of that one task and does it.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it sounds like they weren't that interested in it to begin with. Which is fine, just choose a better team next time.
You seeing you needed to help out is a good thing. It sounds like they're just not used to working in a team environment. However, where you went wrong was lack of communication.
It sounds like you have a natural leadership type of personality, which is great, because you're the type of guy to get things done. But, you should have called them up and told them what your plan was since you had the time to pick up some slack.
If they refuse to do their part but still don't want you to help out, then kick them off the team. It's not like you were demanding they do it, you were willing to. Just make sure you ask them first before taking their part.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
rvIceB wrote: Was I wrong to do this?
Unfortunately, yes.
rvIceB wrote: Is this insensitive somehow?
Very.
Do the "other shoes" thing.
You have agreed to do something, and you've spent every available moment working it out in your head, but you haven't been able to find the time to actually sit down and code/unbug it. This is annoying you, because you don't like failing in your responsibilities, and you feel guilty about it.
Some a'hole who's got too much free time on his hands decides to cut you out altogether.
Tell me how you feel.
rvIceB wrote: Does anyone else think this is an issue with ego getting in the way of productivity?
If you choose to interpret it that way, then others will indeed drop you in the "a'hole" pigeonhole -- and also drop the idea of working with you.
rvIceB wrote: Or am I really just a jerk
Not at all.
rvIceB wrote: for making sure we follow our promises that were decided from the start?
OK, Now you're being a jerk.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
This blog post[^] is really into it,  its funny and somewhat interesting too. It depicts what would have happened, if Java and JavaScript were humans. 
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
---
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
---
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
|
Someone lit the fire to overcome the cold weather
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Plane.
Boat.
I'm not risking any trains!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
And there was also CARS........15000 trapped in the french alps due to heavy snow.
|
|
|
|
|
There aren't any major bicycle races going on today, are there? 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
too late ! I already did 2 tubes and 1 tyre on my standard 33km Sunday ride 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With all the planes going missing, I have to wonder if there's a Bond villain hiding in a secret volcano lair.
|
|
|
|
|
If they don't find this plane, then this only adds to the conspiracy theory that they are stealing planes to be used in future terrorist attacks.
Anyhow, I hope they find the plane to bring some closure for the families.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: the reply was 'too complicated' and 'can't you remote in'?
kmoorevs wrote: lot's of questions about the 8 interface
I suspect these two are related...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
modified 27-Dec-14 11:59am.
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: I'm sure there will be lot's of questions about the 8 interface though.
I recommend installing Start8[^]. Makes using Win8 a lot easier. There are also freeware products available, but (IMHO) they're not as good as Start8.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, That's first on the list! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
