His arguments...
1. Same machines were used in the previous election, when the Jaya's party won - why was she silent then?
and a little more technical explanation is this...
2)Lets say you key in 2+2 = in a calculator. Can the result be vary in different places? i.e., 5 in chennai, 6 in bangalaore and 12 in Delhi ?? Jaya's claim is as good as saying "yes" to the above scenario
1. Same machines were used in the previous election, when the Jaya's party won - why was she silent then?
and a little more technical explanation is this...
2)Lets say you key in 2+2 = in a calculator. Can the result be vary in different places? i.e., 5 in chennai, 6 in bangalaore and 12 in Delhi ?? Jaya's claim is as good as saying "yes" to the above scenario
EVM is not a "programmable" device like a computer instead it is a pre-programmed device - like a calculator...
I was wondering what if we really make the calculators processing "subjective". Put various personalities 'inside' the calculator and ask the same question...!!! obvious reasons names are mnemonic 'ed
When asked what is 2+2 to our folks of course across heirarchy this is what the answer is.. (Yes this is fictional..actual would be more dangerous & creative !!!)
SP: 2 + 2. Check with Nn about this. We have to make sure we are meeting the customer deadlines. He had a similar requirement.(similar what !!!)
Thanks SP we will do that..
KM: Based on the last Q1 results and from irwin's (CEO) directions, our current target for this Quater is not focusing on such things. We may revisit this in latter Quater this year..(My god for 2+2, ok sir, we will come next quarter. At least don't give similar answer for the hike this year!!).
Besides during the slump of 2001 most of the employees asked the management to have them retained - even if it means a pay-cut. Situation in 2009 may become worse than this. However I have put my word to bb and top management, and made sure, jobs are secured first and ( then We may worry about 2+2 ?? ). As I always say project's interest comes above all personal interests.(Am still searching for the person who suggested KM for this question. Man am feeling like coming out of my appraisal Gyan.)
SH:As mentioned in section 2.3.4.5.3 in assumption section of the xyz DD (design doc) we have clearly documented this..
(Documented what ??)
That this functionality will not be changed in the current release.
If you expect anything else, then it has to be a CR. (CR - Change Request...will do !!!)
SV: I need to check this with the team, but is this a requirement to be handled post-golive?
I'll send you a rough (answer ?? )estimation for this by today.
CK: No no ..we have to do the impacting for this change request and as part of this we may have to institutionalize the process we are going to follow for check-in, followed by commit and roll-back steps.
But CK..this is about...
Hear me out completely...
(Completely...u have more...ayyoo..me abscond )
BH: mmm...I tend to support Tony's view on this, but still we expect a clear documentation about the process from the vendor(my company - if my niece, doing 4th class, hears this she would assume I'm a mango vendor.)
MH: Ok Peri, let me test this in test instance...
Me: I think we haven't changed this since last release. What is the problem faced now?
Product-Support: Can you send us the log files and which version of the product are you in?
I was wondering what if we really make the calculators processing "subjective". Put various personalities 'inside' the calculator and ask the same question...!!! obvious reasons names are mnemonic 'ed
When asked what is 2+2 to our folks of course across heirarchy this is what the answer is.. (Yes this is fictional..actual would be more dangerous & creative !!!)
SP: 2 + 2. Check with Nn about this. We have to make sure we are meeting the customer deadlines. He had a similar requirement.(similar what !!!)
Thanks SP we will do that..
KM: Based on the last Q1 results and from irwin's (CEO) directions, our current target for this Quater is not focusing on such things. We may revisit this in latter Quater this year..(My god for 2+2, ok sir, we will come next quarter. At least don't give similar answer for the hike this year!!).
Besides during the slump of 2001 most of the employees asked the management to have them retained - even if it means a pay-cut. Situation in 2009 may become worse than this. However I have put my word to bb and top management, and made sure, jobs are secured first and ( then We may worry about 2+2 ?? ). As I always say project's interest comes above all personal interests.(Am still searching for the person who suggested KM for this question. Man am feeling like coming out of my appraisal Gyan.)
SH:As mentioned in section 2.3.4.5.3 in assumption section of the xyz DD (design doc) we have clearly documented this..
(Documented what ??)
That this functionality will not be changed in the current release.
If you expect anything else, then it has to be a CR. (CR - Change Request...will do !!!)
SV: I need to check this with the team, but is this a requirement to be handled post-golive?
I'll send you a rough (answer ?? )estimation for this by today.
CK: No no ..we have to do the impacting for this change request and as part of this we may have to institutionalize the process we are going to follow for check-in, followed by commit and roll-back steps.
But CK..this is about...
Hear me out completely...
(Completely...u have more...ayyoo..me abscond )
BH: mmm...I tend to support Tony's view on this, but still we expect a clear documentation about the process from the vendor(my company - if my niece, doing 4th class, hears this she would assume I'm a mango vendor.)
MH: Ok Peri, let me test this in test instance...
Me: I think we haven't changed this since last release. What is the problem faced now?
Product-Support: Can you send us the log files and which version of the product are you in?
No comments:
Post a Comment