Mahone

A lot of those in the apple crowd seem to have an expectation that those who work in the IT field will naturally have a preference to apple products as they supposedly "just work" and make their lives easier... in my experience, that couldn't be further from the truth. Not only do they not "just work", but I've found that people in the IT field seem to have a burning hatred of apple products in general.

In what way? As I said, I gave you the official church policy. You claimed that they don't always obey the official church policy (by saying someone you know was deal with by the church in a way that goes against their policy). I said that can't be proven and therefore can't be explained. Simples.

Then why does their statement say the opposite? I'm not actually saying anything other than what they have said. It seems to be you that's going against what they have said. It's not up to the church to decide what is a child sex offence and what isn't. The catholic church decided to do this a few years back, and they've regretted it ever since. I believe the LDS church does not want to follow in their footsteps.

Actually you're wrong. I'm saying what the church officially won't do. There is a difference. My statements are also backed up by official church sources. I also clarified my belief of your statements in my previous post. It's nothing to do with that. I'm simply providing you with an official church statement. You appear to disagree with official church sources, and that's fine. What happens officially is not always the same as what happens unofficially, but as it's unproven, it cannot be explained and we can't really go any further than that.

I wasn't trying to say or imply that you were lying, merely that because it's not coming from a notable source, it'd be impossible to prove that it happened, or explain why it happened. And morally I agree with you, but officially the church won't take personal circumstances into account in this instance. What they do unofficially as of yet is unexplained and unproven.

All I can tell you is the churches official stance. And I've proven it with official sources. What happened to someone you know can't be explained or proven unfortunately.

It's not about what's morally child abuse and what's not, or what your opinion on what child abuse is or isn't. It's what is legally defined as child abuse, and yes, sometimes it's unfair. But the church has to protect themselves too. If someone has any kind of conviction of child abuse, regardless of how fair it was, the church cannot put them in a position of working with children.

Child AbuseIt doesn't define "child abuse", but in answer to your question, yes, I believe it's appropriate. If the church is aware someone is a convicted child sex offender, and lets them work with children, and a child was once again abused? Can you imagine the media frenzy? Look what happened to the catholic church!

I was under the impression that anyone convicted of crimes relating to children is automatically blanket barred by the church from ever having a calling involving children, regardless of the legality of them working with children in the local area?

You'd probably be better off putting QOS rules on the access point and/or the router. Personally I'd split the wired and wireless traffic into two different VLANs, this will stop any broadcast storms affecting the clerks, and then have QOS rules on the wireless VLAN. Use these rules to give wired traffic priority over wireless traffic at all times (I'm assuming your clerks are connected via an ethernet cable as opposed to wireless). Also use the QOS rules to throttle wireless traffic in general, so they can't abuse the internet connection itself, and saturate it with packets. This will solve the issue without having to ever find out who it is. I tend to treat issues like this as though the network is 50 times bigger than it actually is. Reactively finding an individual user that's causing issues on a public network could be a nightmare on a network with tens of thousands of users, so instead you'd proactively enforce rules on all the users to prevent it happening, as opposed to stopping it once it's started on an individual basis.

Touché

I was vaguely aware of a ward cleaning rota in my ward, but wasn't aware of it's contents and was too busy to look into it. I caught a glance of it a couple of weeks back, and was surprised to see my name was on there. I was surprised because I hadn't been asked or informed that my name had been added to the list. This is not the way to do it :)

There is no such thing as American English. There is English, and there are mistakes.

It's unlikely she would be stopped entering the temple, or have any comments made by the temple workers. In only very rare circumstances will a valid temple recommend holder be stopped at the door, it's just not the temple's policy. You could go through in baggy jeans and t-shirt if you wish, and probably wouldn't (and shouldn't) be stopped. What probably will happen, is that at some point during her visit, depending on the severity of the dyed hair, a member of the temple presidency will have been alerted and will take her aside and have a quiet word about general attire and appearance in the temple.

To be fair to McStaff however, if I ever go to one of their restaurants at meal times, it's usually pretty chaotic, with staff trying to juggle multiple tasks very quickly. Couple that with a system which I believe has fairly limited capacity for custom orders, requiring staff to actually remember something, it doesn't surprise me that mistakes like this are made. I've been lucky enough to never have to work in McDonalds in the past, but my BIL did. His current job gives him 3 or 4 times the salary the average full time McJob would earn, and he claims his stress levels are never anywhere near as high as they were when employed by McDonalds. Go figure lol.

Whilst I don't agree with the policy, there is more to it than what the article portrays. Either way, was the teacher setting his students up for the real world by showing a very clear and public disregard and disobedience for his employers policies? Unfortunately, in the real world, if you do that (regardless of whether you agree with the policies) you get fired. There are better methods for voicing a disagreement. Those students learnt a very good lesson I think.

I personally would prefer the pitcher. Whilst I understand some people prefer the interaction with the waiter, I find too many appearances annoying. We're a demanding lot really, aren't we? And this discussion is now making me drool, I want cracker barrel

I hate the concept of tipping. Whilst in theory we're supposed to tip for good service, a young and pretty female waitress is far more likely to get tipped than a 40-50 year old balding man, even if the level of service is identical. I find that tipping is much more prevalent in the USA than the UK, so I have to adjust my attitude towards it in order to not appear rude. Plus my wife beats me if I don't leave anything Someone posted on here once (sorry, don't remember who) that they tip according to how their drinks are kept refilled. Refillable drinks are not very common in the UK anyway, so I'm usually happy to tip based on this when in the US.

The problem isn't lack of proactivity, or the lack automating and eliminating jobs. You'd be surprised at the amount of time I've spent automating tasks that were carried out by previous teams manually - it's one of the things I'm well known for among my colleagues, I will script and set in group policy things they didn't know were possible, and I'm currently in the process of creating a single web based interface for AD account creation, exchange mailbox creation, cisco PBX directory number creation plus various other things which each new user needs to be set up with, so this can be offloaded from the IT department totally. Much of my over time is taken up with new projects, or major configuration changes to current systems. Stuff that generally can't be done during working hours due to the nature of the changes, and the potential for downtime. The very nature and culture of a college means this happens on a regular basis.

What is it that you do in IT? I'm in charge of running a college network, and while my official hours are not that much more than yours, I couldn't do my job unless I did countless hours at home each month on top of my official hours. It just comes with the nature of this aspect of IT unfortunately, and commonly accepted.

Some surprising (and not so surprising) results here. BBC News - How hard do you work? Also, where are you on the global pay scale: BBC News - Where are you on the global pay scale?

I know how it works in reality, and how it works is what I'm frustrated with. Very often, a degree is listed within the requirements for a job, and there is no room for equivalent experience. If you don't have that degree, it doesn't matter how many years you've been working in that field and what you know within that field, you cannot get that job - they won't look at the rest of your resume due to the lack of one of the required items. I disagree. You can easily have learnt about HCI in on the job experience. Yes, you should probably start off on a lower wage because you don't already have that knowledge, but 5 to 10 years of designing websites and learning about HCI, and applying it practically in the process using knowledge gained from colleagues, personal research and simply through mistakes would make you arguably in a much better position than someone with this theoretical knowledge via a degree, but no real practical experience of using this knowledge. But many headhunters obviously disagree, or it's just easier to do their job by using a degree to shortlist? Whatever the reason, I don't believe a degree should be the be all and end of of a persons career, it's just not that simple. This is why I'm spending a lot of time that I don't really have, and a lot of money that (in my opinion) could be better spent else where on getting this piece of paper. At the moment my experience is holding out, and I'm doing a lot better in terms of salary than most of my degreed associates, but there is a limit to how long this will carry on.

That's the point I'm trying to make though. I realise a degree is necessary, but it's only necessary because of what headhunters perceive it to be worth (which is my opinion isn't anywhere near as much as a lot of people think it is). What I'm doing in my degree, I've already done as part of my career and I'm not really learning much. I'm only working on my degree because of what others believe it to be worth, not what I think it's worth.

Although by doing this, it likely means that someone else will have to take the position and work Sundays. I don't see that someone else having to leave their family on a Sunday is any better than me missing church. The way I determine whether working on Sundays is appropriate or not mostly depends on the service I'd be providing. E.g. working in a convenience store would not be necessary, as I'm sure that's a service that we could all go without for one day of the week - to have it 7 days a week is a luxury and in this case, I'd probably turn down the job. A security guard however is usually a necessity - we'd be in a bit of a mess if all security guards left their posts because it was Sunday.

This is something that has been a contentious subject for me as well. I've been working in my chosen field for 6 or 7 years now, progressing up the ranks at a reasonable pace, but I know that I've been somewhat lucky and eventually I will hit a wall without an appropriate degree. So I'm also working on my batchelors degree part time, which is costing me a fair amount of money and an awful lot of time which I don't have a lot of right now, and yet I'm "learning" things that I learnt through work experience. It seems to me that I'm spending thousands of hours and pounds simply to obtain a piece of paper to verify in a different way that I know what I already know, and it doesn't give me a lot of enthusiasm. It makes me annoyed at lazy headhunters that refuse to even look past those who don't have a degree but might have an equivalent in experience. Anyway, rant over :)