Does anyone want to know which one of the staffers deleted the /etc file ?93 responses total.
Nope, not particularly. I'm sure whoever-it-is is plenty embarassed now without having to put up with harassing e-mail and tels. As long as they learn form it and move on, I'm happy.
I see no reason to make it public.
I'd kind of like to know, but not very much. I would be vastly amused if it was the same staffer who said, as part of the "whither the Sun 670?" item, that Grex staff was so *very, very careful*, making a contrast with the supposedly wild and crazy M-Net staff. 8-)
I would much rather not know. A mistake was made, and then corrected. That's all I want to know. (The "corrected" part is the important part.)
I dont think "staffer x" should be forced out in the open, but he/she should want to reveal himself/herself in the interst of full disclosure and honesty. Noone is going to make a big deal out of it. We allmakemistakes. It would just be in keeping with the idea of Grex being a completely openb and above board place that things like this shouldntbe kept secret. Then again the staffconf isclosed, so maybe there are lots of secrets not security related that are kept by staff. I think if I was "staffer x", I'd feel obligated to explain-- not just to staff, but to everyone here just what happened and why. I wouldnt be comfortable just sitting in the shadows and letting other staff cover for me. And I'd want to reveal myself if only tobe able to personally publicly thank Marcus for fixing the problem and getting my assout of that mess. It is about honesty andopenness.
"Staffer x" should also reveal himself in fairness to the other staffers. They dont deserve to have the finger of blame pointed at them for something they didnt do. Yet in the future, if a staffer has problems with a user or users, they might well say, "....yeah right, I bet *YOU* were the staffer who deleted the entire password file back in October" .etc Staff doesnt need to collectively take the blame for one person's honest mistake.
In fact, for staffer x to sit back and let the rest of the people on staff cover forhim and share theblame, when they did nothing wrong, seems to me to indicate a certain levelof contempt for his fellow staffers. He shouldnt wantany of them to individually or as a group feel any heat for this now or in the future..
Or maybe it's a sign of solidarity among *all* staffers? Maybe they know that they will be collectively accused of doing it, and accept that? Like the Minbari, who cannot lie, except to protect the honor of another. <look out, robh is quoting B5 now>
Perhaps we should dock that staffer's pay? ;) It really doesn't matter, long term. All the staffers are people who mean well, so singling one out for some kind of censure is pointless. If staff doesn't trust that staffer, they will recommend that to the Board.
It seems to me that no member of staff deserves any amout of "blame", richard, whether they were the one with the finger-slip this time or not. These things can happen. It could have been any of us. Eventaully, if GREX lasts long enough, it's a good bet that it will. The staffer in question did what was possible to recover as soon as the error was noticed and called in help immediately and in a responsible manner. That's all that's required. If this were to become a habit, you can count on corrective measures being taken. Otherwise, it's fixed now and it's over.
(Just think how embarassing it would be if all _your_ silly typos were pulicized)
This response has been erased.
I'll apologize to everyone ahead of time, but Richard shut the Fuck up! How can you be such a dork sometimes, and minutes later say something reasonable? Part gymnist? Anyway, these things happen. I lost all of my root filesystem at home do to a similar typo. I actually thought about doing what Marcus did with inodes and stuff, but decided it would be easier to re-install, and remember the contents of all those files than it would be to learn how to do what Marcus did. Further I did exactly what I expect happened at work one day. I meant to delete *.* on a floppy diskette, but I forgot that current path was the windows directory, not a:\. Re-install again. Guess it's a good thing I wasn't around grex that day or it would have been me...
Richard practices. Not quite as disastrous a type, but I remember once, when I had had root for not too long, I started up some miscellaneous job, and then something came up, so I went to kill it off. I should have typed kill %1, which kills job number 1, but somehow the % did not get into the command. The effect was kill 1, which kills process number 1. This effectively took grex out of multiuser mode. Since I had been dialed in, I was instantly disconnected, as was everyone else. Someone had to go to the warehouse and reboot it. We were down for quite a while before this could happen. I didn't even have keys at the time. It was pretty embarrassing. I can talk about it now, because it was years ago - before the dungeon even.
s/type/typo/ - I can't even type "typo" right. sheesh. Fortunately, that won't kill the system.
We all make mistakes from time to time. I've never wiped out anything that important, but I've certainly done my share of screwing up other things that then needed to be fixed. It's part of running a complex system. The important part is beign able to put things back together after something like that happens. In other words, we, the whole staff, need to make a collective effort to do much more frequent backups.
Right. The typo was something any one on staff could have done. It would have been a minor problem except that we hadn't done a backup since March. Any one of the staff members (except maybe Mike O'Leary) could have made a backup at any time since March. None of us did. So the fact of the matter is that it is perfectly fair for the staff to take the "blame" for this problem collective, and assign the "credit" for fixing it to Marcus individually. We all caused it. Marcus fixed it. So, I'm perfectly happy with the current assignment of blame and credit. It hits the spot. Assigning blame is only useful if it helps identify a problem and fix it. We're going to be a lot more careful about backups. That's about as much of a fix as we can make.
I said I thought it was obviously an innocent mistake. I just think since it isnt serious, there is no point covering up p the identity of the staffer who did it. We shouldnt have people on staff who arent honest and forthright about what they did. I suspect some ofyou might feel differently if Marcus and staffer x had kept this to themselves and hadnt even told anyone else on staf who he was. Why can this stafferbe more honest with everyone else on staff and not with the rest of us who use grex? Why is total honesty not the best policy?
This response has been erased.
I don't think there is a "cover-up". Just a towering lack of concern for making someone take the blame for a mistake that has been corrected.
This is not about "making someone take the blame" I have never suggested that "staffer x" be turned in by anyone. I was only saying that this staffer himself should *want* to accept the blame, because it *was* his mistake, even if it was corrected. It wasnt just a minor mistake. This person deleted the most sensitive files on grex, and even if it was an accident, you cant trivialize it after the fact. You cant say, "well it could have happened to anyone" It didnt happen to anyone. It happened to this person. And he doesnt want to give his name, say "I caused grex to be down for three days and ruined Marcus's weekend, and I'm sorry". It would just be the dignified thing to do.
What makes you so sure that it was a "he", Richard? Do you assume that Valerie and I are above such errors? or do you assume that, as women, no one else on staff would trust us with enough responsibility to have a chance at such an error? Sheesh. All, right, shall I turn over my keys, Richard? Would you feel better if someone took the fall? I will publicly apologize that GREX was down and that Marcus had to spend so much time cleaning up. I'm very sorry. Now, can we drop it??? Please?!
Because every reference to this staffer has been "he", "him" I just think that when major staff errors occur, the staffer in question should come forward. Why am I attacked for asking for something so simple and logical and dignfied?
Because you contradict yourself within a single paragraph?
(Re #23: I just looked through this whole item and couldn't find any responses, other than your own, that attached a gender to the staffer. Did I miss any?)
Nope.
This response has been erased.
I don't think it much matters if the staffer was a he, she, an alien from Sirgil, or me. Shit happens. Everyone on grex staff has made mistakes. I have made mistakes. Nobody is perfect. Total honesty is not a good policy. Imagine, for moment, if in this world, if everyone were suddenly compelled to say *exactly* what they were thinking, and knew to be the truth, to the best of their ability. Think about it. You *must* encounter situations, frequently, where you think thoughts that would only get you into trouble if you were to verbalize them. You *must* encounter situations and facts, which if you were to describe those facts in isolation to another, would lead that person to an erroneous conclusion. There is clearly a lot of interest in "who" deleted those files. Your (Richard) fascination is evidence of this. There are also plenty of people who would hear this fact, in isolation, and conclude that the person, plant alien, or whatever, that did this, is an inherently bad and evil person. This is human nature, in all its glorious imperfection. To compell someone to disclose their identity, under such circumstances, is in fact nothing less than an attack, however much you might like to pretend it's merely "honest disclosure", or "something the staffer should want to do himself". Richard, I have an admission to make. Grex has a fatal flaw. Grex has a serious and fundemental weakness in its design. Someday, Grex *will* be destroyed by this flaw. Richard, this flaw was not an oversight. Every founder knew about this flaw. Richard, I was there, I knew about the flaw, and I am guilty of allowing grex to be created with this flaw. Every founder knew about this flaw.
This is bizarre. I'm not impressed that "seeker" doesn't have the intregrity to ask such a question with his/her own name, rather than a psuedo. Thanks Marcus. I knew about the flaw too.
Okay, fair enough. I confess that I stole the root password and accidentally deleted /etc. Since richard loved blaming me for everything when I was on board/staff, this admission should quiet him downfor a while. >8)
I confess that I clandestinely entered the Pumpkin, used the "fatal flaw" which Marcus has confessed to in order to gain the root password, and *deliberately* erased the password file in the vain hope that Grex would collapse and M-Net would inherit the whole local conferencing empire. Muahahahahaaaa!
No wait, *I* did it! I hereby resolve not to work on Grex while in the middle of research for my pharmacology degree.
No, it was me. STeve asked me to take care of a couple of files the other day, and I made a little mistake. He and the entire staff have pretty thoroughly berated me in private for being so careless, and I am sure I will never again be given the root password on Grex.
This response has been erased.
geez...all I was sugggesting is that individual staffers be accountable not just to staff, but to the members and users of grex. Those are the people who staff'w work affects. Why cant it just be a policy that\ staff beopen and above board when these things happen? Grex will run better and have less controversy. And IOm still convinced that if the rest of staff didnt know the identity of staffer x and he didnt come forward, tey 'dbeupset. (and actually I think it was probably someone who had reason to be messing with those files, like someone who has a program interfacing with the password file. Andhasbeen regularly updating that program...that limits who it likely was IMO)[A
There are only two people who have programs that make changes to the password file. Unfortunately for your logic train, neither of those people does any regular maintenance on the password file. Richard, you made this controversy. You, and you alone. Unfortunately, controversy like this is not harmless. Even if *you* don't intend to be malicious, and do not yourself intend to question the integrity and trustworthiness of grex staff, to others, what you have done, and are doing here, *does* look like an attack. Remember what I said just now about "total honesty" and "facts out of context"? When people not familiar with grex see the questions you keep raising and raising, some of them will assume that where there's smoke, there's fire. That hurts grex, in more ways than you know. First, it hurts grex financially. People are *much* less likely to contribute to grex after they read your comments. Secondly, it hurts grex staff. At least one grex staff member very nearly quit because of you, and what you have done here. You've started a process here that polarizes grex staff, the grex board, and grex users. This process is particularly destructive to the principles you've stated you believe in. Grex is, fundementally, not a computer, not a democracy, but a social organism. That means it lives and dies according to the whim of its constituents. That social fabric has only limited strength. It is entirely possible for a single person to `kill' grex, merely by poisoning the social fabric. That is the fatal flaw that grex has. Unfortunately, that flaw is an integral part of the design of grex. The flaw is also inherent and inescapable. Because grex is public, because grex is group run, because grex is a dynamic balance in a changing reality, it's impossible to guarantee that grex will exist forever, or to design grex in such a way that nobody could ever kill it. The people who were with grex since the beginning know that grex is mortal, that it has finite resources, and that it is in some ways very fragile. I think it is tempting for people who come and see grex apparently strong and healthy, to think that it is not important to contribute, or that it doesn't matter if their contributions are negative, or (apparently in the case of Richard), it's harmless if that negative contribution takes the form of words said in a conference. Sadly, that's just not the case. Personally, what Richard has said doesn't usually bother me so much, and I even agree with many of his ideals. I do find that in many cases, Richard's reasoning has serious flaws. Certainly here, whatever Richard's intentions were, his effect is directly countrary to his stated principles.
I know that Grex is fragile. Suspicion and dishonesty are two things that could destroy the structure of this place. Staff is a cohesive unit right now, but it may not always be so. Therefore it should be standard practice not to cover things up. Not to approach situations in anything but a completely open and above board manner. This is done here most of the time. But there are instances, such as this one, where staff puts its own interests (namely protecting one another) above the interests of Grex. I am not attacking staffer x. I am not saying he should be punished or reprimanded or anything. It was obviously an honest mistake. But it *was* a mistake, and he should feel the responsibility to own up to it. Such cover-ups in the future could lead to a lot of accusations and distrust. Its a bad precedent. Grex will lose members and users if the impression is given off that staff really is a group that operates on its own agenda, and will willingly cover up for one another. Its just not a healthy thing to be doing. I'm saying this because I value Grex, and because someone needs to be the bad guy and point these things out. Im not the only one who feels this way. I didnt even enter this item. Im just the one who is willing to take the flak to try and see that what is right is done. Ive been trying *not* to make a nuisance of myself the last few months since I came back to Grex. It is not my desire to be controversial or to have everyone hate me. Given the abuse Im taking, you must see that I do care about Grex. Im not a masochist..if I was anything less than serious I wouldnt be doing this. Staffer x should reveal himself. Just because its the right thing to do.
> Ive been trying *not* to make a nuisance of myself the last few months > since I came back to Grex. It is not my desire to be controversial or > to have everyone hate me. I've noticed and appreciated that, Richard. Thank you. > I'm saying this because I value Grex, and because someone needs to be > the bad guy and point these things out. Im not the only one who feels > this way. I didnt even enter this item. Im just the one who is > willing to take the flak to try and see that what is right is done. Perhaps you're not. It's interesting, though, that you're the only one saying anything, other than a coward who doesn't have the guts to ask an honest question in a public way. Perhaps there aren't as many people in a stir about this as you think there are. Staff, as an entity, has taken responsibility for the gaffe and made it right. We have done that specifically to avoid a lot of accusations and mistrust of an individual. The board appoints the staff, and they too are aware of exactly what happened. If they think there's a problem, they will deal with it. The users appoint the board. If the users as a whole are dissatisfied with the way the board (and by extension, the staff) are running things, they are always free to say so by calling a vote and "throwing the bums out" or by calling an issue to vote and mandating how they want it handled. We don't operate by fiat here, no matter how well meaning. If you want things run your way, make sure your membership is up-to-date, convince a majority of your fellow mwmbers that you're right, and call a membership vote. So far, the membership has endorsed the way things have been done here in the past by continuing to re-elect a board dedicated to maintaining what we think of as GREX's way of doing things. When membership sentiment changes, so will the composition of the board. So, to summarize, Richard. We haer you. We appreciate your concern that GREX be the best it can be. We even encourage you to raise the issues you see -- but when you find yourself a lone voice, please drop it. You may speak for a large silent contingent, but probably not. If they agree with you, they'll say so. Honest!
I agree with you on one point, Richard: it's unfair to expect people to be perfect. I'd prefer Grex to be a place where people make mistakes and are forgiven for them, in contrast to, say, the world of government or big business where almost no one ever admits to making a mistake, and those that do are crucified. But I'd like to ask you about your statement that "someone has to be the bad guy and point these things out." And the question I'd like to ask is: Why? I agree that there are times, such as when real corruption or incompetence is entrenched in government, when I'm thankful that there are people pushing their noses into dark corners. But you yourself recognize that that's not what's going on here - it was just a mistake. And, as Marcus said, this kind of bitterness does real damage to the system. The more we discuss this, the more it looks like the Grex staff and board are "circling the wagons". I was reluctant to weigh in before now, because I didn't want to add to that impression, because that's not what was intended at all.
(Misti slipped in.)
Would it be reasonable to say that the identity of this staffer be made known to the non-staff members of the Board? Im assuming this has only been discussed in the staff conf or mailing list, so nobody not on staff would know?
Well, I must say I, too, was curious when I heard of this as to the identity of 'staffer x'. Had this been a case of malice, or of incompetence, I too would have pressed the point and asked about his or her identity. And if I were someone who had made such a mistake, I would feel inclined to step forward. _However_, and this is the important part, I also trust the word of the staff that this was an honest and innocent mistake, and because of that I do not feel inclined to point fingers or make accusations. If it appeared that staff were not doing their job properly, then I'd have a reason to want to know 'staffer x's identity, but _this is not how it appears_, and hence the only interest I have is that of idle curiousity.
The entire staff was notified very soon after the accident, which makes perfect sense since the thing to do was get all available forces working on getting Grex back up. In the next few days there was at least one bit of mail addressed "baff" (board and staff). Actually, this item has been the location of the majority of the discussion.
#43...and in that one piece of mail addressed "baff" was the specific name of the staffer given? Im of the opinion that when something this serious happens, honest mistake or not, it should be discussed. Probably put on the agenda of the next board meeting for very very brief discussion. Staffer X would there recount what he did, explain it was an honest mistake, and the board would say ok and go on to the next issue. Even if it was just a formality, it would be proper as a point of order, because this was a serious incident (I mean how many times in grex's years of exsistence has the entire password file been deleted?) And then the Board could address the more important issues, like why havent more backups been done and does a formal schedule for regular backups need to be drawn up to avoid this in the future? There is no reason everything shouldnt be laid out, so that everyone-- not just staff-- can draw their own conclusions. Staff wants to close off discussion, forestall outside opinions. Even if this specific incident is minor, the fact is that staff's attitude is bad. Present all the facts and let people decide for themselves.
<Scott throws up his hands and walks away, baffled.>
Re #44: Why, Richard? To accomplish what?
Am I too late to confess? I wanna confess that *I* did it.
Thanks for the white space Richard. It was very refreshing after all those words.
Now Jan, that wasnt white space. When we airheads reveal our innermost thoughts, that's what it looks like.
I am making up armbands for all who will join me in wearing them.
I want an armband!
This response has been erased.
And, for what it's worth, to answer Richard's question about whether the non-staff board members were notified of Scott's identity, the answer is yes. Scott sent out two pieces of mail, one to at least staff but maybe baff right after it happened, explaining what had happened, and saying that he had already called Marcus and Marcus was on his way over. Scott later sent mail to baff, the board and staff mailing list, explaining the situation again. Richard can go on all he wants trying to claim that this was a secret kept from the board, but it simply is not true. That said, I really don't see why this had to go public. People do make mistakes. I imagine there are very few people who have been responsable for any sort of at all complex system who have never done something that screwed it up. Some mistakes are certainly a lot more serious than others.
And in the category of typo type mistakes, I hit control-D there before I intended to. What I meant to say was that while some mistakes are a lot more serious than others, the important thing is that it was fixable. In this case, the much bigger mistake was the mistake by the staff as a whole in not making regular backups. Had we had a recent backup, we would just have had to restore one directory from a tape and would have been back up quite quickly. Even without that, though, this didn't end up being all that serious.
From this item, I know that some people like dpc, seeker, and Richard, all of them I think already knew who deleted the /etc files, but they like to stab "that staff" in his/her back. What's the attitude of these people ? and dpc, you are the M-net staff, if some day the same thing happens to yourself, what's your feeling ? you want to confess that honestly ? I don't think so. <sigh>
This item, to me, bears a striking resemblance to such storied pieces of American history as the Mcarthy hearings. I just know richard will love that analogy.
This is absolutely ridicules! Not even people who deliberately destroy things on this system are hung out like this.
Staffers are not gentlemen, and they do not understand being treated like gentlemen!
This response has been erased.
uh....huh?
Oops, Valerie slipped in. I was referring to Rob's "gentlemen" comment. Oh, and Klaus has an excellent point. We don't publicly hang vandals -- but the staff doesn't deserve that much? Why?
Okay Im sorry if my methods sounded like too much of an attack. I just didnt know why it had to be a secret. If I was Scott, I'd have felt obliged to admit my error because it inconvenienced a lot of people. But it was obviously an accident, so its obvious nothing more needs to be said about it. BTW, because Im not sure what you folks are thinking, no I am not *Seeker* and if I had wanted to enter this item, which I didnt, I'd have used my name as I always do. I agree that it isnt ethical to enter such items and make such accusations unless you use your own name. So who is/was Seeker anyway? I bet it was Robh, probably as a practical joke to annoy Scott and knowing someone like me would respond to it. Admit it Robh, you are Seeker! :)
This response has been erased.
Well, gee, Richard, I don't know what your point is because after all
Scott *did* confess in #32 above! And no, supermom, I'm not on the
M-Net staff, I'm on the Board of Directors. The only recent time
that our staff made a similar boo-boo (leaving a security hole open
allowing the entire System to be erased), he made his mistake public.
But there is no real conflict between the systems on this.
I don't think Grex people wanted to make a big deal of who accidentally
erased /etc/; neither do I.
<robh thanks karouac for actually putting a smiley in his response>
Seeker dialed in direct. Unless seeker has one of Richard's long distance phone cards, I think it's reasonable to suppose seeker is in fact local. I saw speculation from some rather immature people in m-net's party, speculating that it was another particular grex staff member. Perhaps this item was meant to embarass that staff member instead. As it happens, that staff member has put in a lot of hours over the years dealing with computer vandals and with reaping people on grex, so perhaps he's more visible as the "grex heavy" staff member than the rest of us. That's really a shame, because he's actually one of the nicest people I know, and really doesn't deserve that kind of censure, at all.
Hmm. That's interesting, Marcus. I don't hang out in M-Net's party, so I didn't see those comments. However, as a Grex member I have complete and utter faith in Scott. He has put countless hours into the System and is a President Emeritus to boot. (And reboot.)
I'm not sure what the big deal is. The fact that you would do something a certain way doesn't mean that other people would do it the same way. Not everybody holds identical viewpoints. I don't really care who seeker is, and the question to me is pretty much irrelevant. Goodnight.
Well, I think "seeker" showed a cowardly streak in hiding behind a pseudo to stir up trouble. One thing I'll say for Richard is that I admire that fact that when he has something to say, he says it in his own voice and owns up to any flak that results.
It seems to me that it is appropriate for staff members to tell users what they do on the system - for better or worse. What's the big deal? Some time was lost in this case - in others some time is gained. I don't even understand why it has become a big issue, because it isn't. At least, this is the standard I would like to see maintained.
what a mess - despite all the denials and protestations to the contrary, 'whodunnit' is no damn body's business except staff. and the only reason the event itself woulda/coulda become public knowledge is because grex staff prides itself (properly so) with stating 'what happened' when someting does 'happen.' and that is a credit to the system.. we gain a knowledge base of 'things that happen.' isolating some single staffer for a 'happenning' is thw worst sort of political smear opportunity that exists. in ohter words, kerouac, shut the fuck up, ain't none o' yo' bidness, or mine either, for that matter. unless, however, you should want to type in just as much text in PRAISE for mdw (isolated single staffer for a 'happenning') who single-handedly reconstructed the file .... certainly a worthy 'happenning' which just might 'smear' his political bank roll upwards, bigger, better and wider. but that is 180 degrees away from your policy, i perceive - too bad, you had the chance to be a gentleman once. oh, well.
Excellent point, TS. It's a shame that Marcus' efforts didn't generate even half as much stir as a momentary slip of the fingers.
ts I havent responded to this item in 2 weeks...the issue's dead... read coop more often
...but you *did* get here - ahhh, teh beauty of conferencing! thankxxx.
THANK YOU MARCUS !!!!! I wasn't even here at the time, but I've been here before, and I know you put in loads of time for us, as does the rest of the Grex staff. How about we start an item for "I remmeber when mdw fixed ..." and delete this friggin' item, eh?
i'm not sure we have enough disk space for lists like that <g!>!
You're mot certainly right, TS. Especially for Marcus -- but any staffer who has been around a while.
Well, a somewhat censored version of some of the staff cf "what I did" items would make a good start at it. It would be interesting to have them posted somewhere public.
This response has been erased.
(Warning: I said it would be interesting to have them posted, not that they'd make really exciting reading. "Removed user moo45 at user's request. Sent mail to xyz54 to about mail abuse". An awful lot of it is routine stuff like that, unless something has changed.)
(That last example raises another point: Unless someone does a *lot* of censoring, making the "What I Did" item public would publicize the login id's of a lot of people who have -- inadvertently or otherwise -- abused Grex resources. Do folks think that would be appropriate?)
I would censor most user logins out of it. A bother to do on a regular basis, but it would be nice to post some samples.
Yeah, I agree with Jan.
This response has been erased.
Good idea.
changing them all to zzzzzzzzzz would have it's merits also, given the prosaic nature of a majorrity of the scut work y'all have to do. i'm not all that fired up about the 'what i did' item becoming and edited public document. editors goof, most of it is drudgery (williingly accepted by our *volunteers), some it it involves un-doing and/or re-doing something to finalize the goal. and perhaps re-dooing 'it' again...to get it right. that sorty of publicity would unleassh the pit-nickers, slit-shingers, and 20-20 hind-sighters for a ribald romp .. adn the only defense would be to *not* do anything (or keep it secret) and tell them to fsck-off. no, imo, this publicity is not in the better interests of grex. some recent item bythe pseudo 'seeker' bursts to the fore.
Until I read the "What I did" item I had no idea just how much the staff does. I think it's quite appropriate to share that sense of respect I obtained with all Grexers.
I think it would be useful to post it also. It can't hurt for people to have a better sense of what the staff does.
TS may well have a point in that *some* people will have a negative reaction -- but TS, I think they're in the minority. For the most part I think people will be either bored by it or started by the amount and dreariness of it. It will certainly clear up the misconception that being on staff is somehow "glamourous". ;)
This response has been erased.
This idea has taken on a life of its own, and I will *not* be held responsible for the consequences !! :-) I was thinking more of something that was not a behind-the-scenes look, full of praise for staff to offset all the items wherein complaints are made about staff. What you suggest would also serve a purpose, and a good one, but nonetheless, a different one.
This response has been erased.
Cool! I've said it before (tonight, even!), and I'll say it again: Yea, staff!
You have several choices: