Substitute 'fat moron' with 'skinny whiner', the baby with a redhead 'buddy', the doctor with a bushy haired smart girl, keep the 'love will kill them KABOOM', and you have the Harry Potter series.

I guess we can now see why the director of Harry Potter wants to direct this movie. As far as he thinks, it's Harry Potter Book 8, Harry Potter and the Time Lords.

Let's call them 'The Happiness Patrol'.

Not only was it a great Dr Who episode (with good ol' Ace and the 7th doctor), but it paints a pretty grim picture that hits a little too close to the mark of how government works today.

Win Win.

Well, you see, that all depends on if George Lucas directs the new crossover movie.

He mistakenly thought Jar-Jar served value in the original 3 movies.

And this is the single phrase that will prove the universes are totally incompatible:

We are Jar-Jar of Borg. Prepare to be assimmilattee-blr-blr-blr-blr-blr-blrated!

While I got your pointless argument on the size of the brains dictating the age or maturity of the speaker...

You obviously missed mine of how preserving something to age can affect its worth.

And actually moralistic means exactly what I intended. To concern one's self with moral upstanding or concerns (ergo, Morality).

The fact you totally disregarded the point of this entire discussion and went hyper-conservative on spelling and grammar to provide a straw-man, then decided to be cute and form some type of high-brow commentary on metaphors regarding skull sizes and some simpleton knee-jerk relational hypothesis on maturity based on age (weak as it was) without any citations or facts to back up said absurd statements, especially regarding the original fact that you are still trying to displace with a tangent argument, is frankly not meeting the morals of someone who cares. Thus, a moralistic situation. It does, however, meet the requirements of a Troll, which I shall, from this point on after, happily ignore.

Continue to show your lack of latitude and absence of any quantifiable material as much as you want. You only belittle yourself, not that you care.

I, and others, have proved your points lacking, your bias attitude true, and your avoidance of the topic at hand laughable at best.

Cheers.

Depends how long they've been up your buttocks along with your very own head.

Does your gas fumes age things well?

By your total disregard of anything moralistic or logical, obviously not.

And when little adorable 'jonny' pulls a knife and holds the teacher hostage? (worse case scenario)

Or when the kids become disruptive to the teacher in such a way to warrant the expulsion, but the parents pull out the lawyer card and threaten the school system with a big rowdy news report and lawsuit, I bet you, short of something life threatening, the school system is going to fold and let the kid stay or make some arrangements other than expulsion.

Reminds me of a teacher who posted in their blog how horrible their students were to such a degree they vented (in a moment of absolute stupidity) on their blog site... which got them sacked.

No word, however, on the 'horrible children' they talked about. Last heard, they were still in school. Fancy that.

The parents, generally, don't give a crap. Until it's their reputation on the line, then they solve it through the nastiest way possible that schools can either fight and lose face winning, or capitulate and hide it behind the scenes.

A lot of their money comes from the board. The money of the board comes from capitol committees where they, like the school board, have their reputations to worry about as well. You think they'll give them more cash for looking poorly? It affects their end of year bonus. Won't happen.

So, little jonny doing his threats, up to and likely including pulling a knife, very likely is being swept under the rug even as we speak at some school district in the good ol' USA.

Money talks. If you don't have it, which the majority of the teachers do not, then you're screwed.

Nitpicking grammar and rhetoric, one could accuse you of exhibiting bias as well.

Did you bother to garnish detail of what the discussions were, that were included as being 'superior'?

Did you even hesitate to question any merit to this being valid, or did you, like a rabid slash dot-er go right for the spelling/grammar nazi juggler so you could get your small little hypocrite moment?

Step back a moment and polish your pot, Mr. Kettle.

None of this would be an issue if corporations actually thought of their employees as assets.

They do not.

They treat their IT professionals like slave labor, underpaying the lot of them and overworking their hours without more than a by-your-leave. If you don't like it, well, don't let the door hit you on the ass while we get someone else who's starving on the street who most likely can do your job, even if it isn't as good. But hey, more reason to pay them less, and in doing so, lower the entire class pay for the entire group while we're at it.

It boils down to trust. The companies should be paying the employees the money their experience deserves, to support and build out the environment that these professionals know how to build.

If an IT professional wanted to damage a system, having a keyless password system like CA or RSA have for running daemon kernels (windows, linux, solaris, aix, etc), or putting in advanced API layer user control right into the kernel, or any other number of leaps and bounds is frankly ridiculous. Who do you think is IMPLEMENTING this to begin with. The same IT professionals you are knowingly trying to stop getting access to. Sounds rather hypocritical.

If you don't trust your IT professionals with access to the systems, then why the hell are you trusting them to implement the security to the systems you don't trust them with?

Either trust your IT professionals to do the job right, or hire new IT professionals. Simple as that.

I remember when company loyalty was prided. Now it's not uncommon to see people running to leave a company they work for because of bad treatment.

I think the problem is the Management, not IT.

Sadly, you can only do the 8-5 shift and deal with it situation on corporate entities that don't require 24/7 uptime.

And you can only play this type of hard-ball if your direct IT management are in your corner.

Where I work, that's not the case. Their mantra is 'We do it because we're the ones who care the most'. My thoughts is I really don't give a rats ass when someone else should be responsible for it, and we're being turned into martyrs, but no one listens to me.
Ownership on this company. The last person who touches it owns it. We now 'own' most of the company, applications, databases, networking... see the problem? Sure, responsibility is nice, but not when the hours and responsibility grow, but not the head count.

And who in their right mind wants to 'own' Tibco and SAP?

So, anyone have a good decent job for a Lead System Architect on a nice 8-5 job? :)