Knock Down, Then Kick

---

Account frozen...

Knock Down, Then Kick

ouch...


If I was the guys boss..I dunno...I doubt I would fire him over it, but there would be discipline.

---

Knock Down, Then Kick

ouch...


If I was the guys boss..I dunno...I doubt I would fire him over it, but there would be discipline.

Bad judgment?
Definitely!
Fire able offense?
Possible!
Grounds for a lawsuit for the defendent?
Definitely!

---

Account frozen...

Knock Down, Then Kick

ouch...


If I was the guys boss..I dunno...I doubt I would fire him over it, but there would be discipline.

I think that people can be comfortable that security has beamed this man out of our building.

smart_ _ _ little tart eh? what's he doing quotin' Star Trek terms - he should

be arrested for makin' such statements . . . ;)

I find this very unpalatable. The notion that an employer can use a minuscule breakage of a rule to fire somebody. Never mind that they have given years of service or that he himself and other management are breaking rules on a vast scale by pocketing expenses that they shouldn't and taking advantage of 'perks' when they shouldn't.

Installing BOINC an a company PC may be against company rules, but what harm is it doing? Exactly what damage is it causing and what monetary gain is transferred from the employer to the employee?

This notion the "he must be disciplined" is like agreeing that there must be another Spanish Inquisition; religious freaks of the Middle Ages determined to prove you did wrong.

It is so easy to find a 'rule' that you broke if your employer decided he doesn't like your face any more. In more book that is utterly wrong and should be condemned, not installing a harmless program on your PC.

---

flaming balloons

iX posted in part:

Installing BOINC an a company PC may be against company rules, but what harm is it doing? Exactly what damage is it causing and what monetary gain is transferred from the employer to the employee?

It is so easy to find a 'rule' that you broke if your employer decided he doesn't like your face any more. In more book that is utterly wrong and should be condemned, not installing a harmless program on your PC.

The problems I would see is that the employer foots the extra electricity costs that BOINC and project applications would incur. At my work place the five computers are used for about 12 hours and the CPU usage is not constant. I don't know how much BOINC and the applications would cost in electricity but it would add up especially if BOINC is used on several. Plus the wear on the HDD's. The proper and ethical solution would be to get the employer's permission first.

Of course the ethics are right. But the excuses used to fire are wrong. The 'extra' electricity used on an already turned on and running PC is negligible, and wear on a HDD is irrelevant; they outlive most parts of a PC and get binned when still working when the PC is disposed of when, eg, the power supply or motherboard goes, or it's just simply replaced by another newer model.

---

flaming balloons

iX posted in part:

Installing BOINC an a company PC may be against company rules, but what harm is it doing? Exactly what damage is it causing and what monetary gain is transferred from the employer to the employee?

It is so easy to find a 'rule' that you broke if your employer decided he doesn't like your face any more. In more book that is utterly wrong and should be condemned, not installing a harmless program on your PC.

The problems I would see is that the employer foots the extra electricity costs that BOINC and project applications would incur. At my work place the five computers are used for about 12 hours and the CPU usage is not constant. I don't know how much BOINC and the applications would cost in electricity but it would add up especially if BOINC is used on several. Plus the wear on the HDD's. The proper and ethical solution would be to get the employer's permission first.

Of course the ethics are right. But the excuses used to fire are wrong. The 'extra' electricity used on an already turned on and running PC is negligible, and wear on a HDD is irrelevant; they outlive most parts of a PC and get binned when still working when the PC is disposed of when, eg, the power supply or motherboard goes, or it's just simply replaced by another newer model.

The point is, I feel that, yeah, sure it was harmless.
Yes, he should have been reprimanded, & not fired.
But the final blow was what his boss told the Associated Press: "I understand his desire to search for intelligent life in outer space, because obviously he doesn’t find it in the mirror in the morning…I think that people can be comfortable that security has beamed this man out of our building."

That is something that I feel he (Charles E. Smith) has grounds for a suit.

---

Account frozen...

My 4 cents worth.

Whilst I would agree that running boinc/seti would not damage a computer as such, and possibly the electricity costs would be neglible, I think the main point here is somewhat different.

An employee is usually not allowed to utilise company assets for their own personal use, unless they have prior permission from their employer. That clause is usually included within their contract of employment.

Any computer attached to the internet, as one running boinc would need to be, could be subject to attack by viruses or spyware which could damage the companies infrastructure. OK most sensible companies would be running a firewall, but that's not the point.

Some years ago I adminned a building with 1000 users running Novell Netware. If one of my users had approached me with a request to run boinc on his computer, I would have refused it. I wouldn't have been prepared to take the risk that my network would be compromised, however remote that possibility might have been.

As to the Managers comment

"I understand his desire to search for intelligent life in outer space, because obviously he doesn’t find it in the mirror in the morning…"

That was a stupidarse thing to have said and there ought to be some redress in the form of an apology in that area, but's that's about all.

I support all the points you make ... including the Manager being publically made to apologise.

It was bad judgement on the admin using the company servers, as one of the SETI AUPs is to ask permission if the computers are not yours, for the reasons Chris gives!

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

I think the hapless employee could possibly sue his boss for 'Defamation of Character' in the UK. Making a comment like that is probably false and unnecessary.

I think the hapless employee could possibly sue his boss for 'Defamation of Character' in the UK. Making a comment like that is probably false and unecessary.

Maybe about 200,000 of us should complain and flood there servers until they rehire the
Poor guy! Crimey its not like he infected their machines...

---

Or maybe we should flood the boss's computer - 200,000 times maybe? lol.

Or maybe we should flood the boss's computer - 200,000 times maybe? lol.

Naaa It wouldn't do any good

---

Or maybe we should flood the boss's computer - 200,000 times maybe? lol.

Naaa It wouldn't do any good

Just like Dilbert's pointy haired boss, he would just hold it upsidedown and shake it to reboot!

Knock Down, Then Kick

Bump.
I wonder who the poor guy is?
He's in Ohio. (Where I'm from.)

---

Account frozen...

Knock Down, Then Kick

The reporter is even wrong - he links to www.seti.org intead of setiathome.berkeley.edu

What as A** the guy should be given a raise IMO.

However, I agree he should have gotten permission first

IMO Tom Hayes (the boss) needs a bit of Kicking - I think that if 600,000 SETI crunchers were to complain to Mr Hayes boss - something good may come of this still.

---

Address

Mr. Tom Hayes
Director
Ohio Department of Job and Family Services
30 East Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio 43266-0423

---

Account frozen...