I am ridiculously relieved after my chat with my boss yesterday. I know we pissed him off with our spat, but now I also know he mostly gets why I'm pissed off. And just that--that there is some understanding in my chain of command about why I'm not as productive as I would like to be--makes me feel so much better!
I know they like my work because they're jumping through so many hoops to keep me here, but it was an abstract appreciation. I don't get a lot of people actually telling me that I'm doing a good job, or even understanding what it is I do. Partly because this place? They just don't know how to manage people.
In other news, I'm very glad I found an Aleve in my purse this morning, since my sinuses are definitely acting up. I don't think the Flonase is helping.
I take it very personally, unfortunately.
That's totally where I am. I'm apologising profusely, trying to get someone to treat *me* like I'm stupid so they can walk me through the expectations, but I feel I've accomplished the major goals--I've described a measurable functionality in a way that doesn't depend on actually understanding the application we're changing, but people, smart people, tell me they don't understand.
Seriously. I get that some of it gets a bit tricky, but I swear I should be able to explain it, and I just can't:
- Post documents only visible to [a defined subset of users] and not the rest of the users (via search and browse)
- Post documents not visible to [a defined subset of users], only the rest of the users (via search and browse)
- Extend the conditional tagging functionality so that the web team can designate chunks of HTML as visible to [a defined subset of users] only
- Extend the conditional tagging functionality so that the web team can designate chinks of HTML as invisible to [a defined subset of users]
I can go into more detail about which sorts of documents are being talked about to give a business context, but it's not relevant to the new requirement. I can talk about who the subset we need this for right away, again for context, but it's not relevant to designing the solution--just the way we can tell them apart, which I've also explained.
WHAT AM I DOING WRONG???
That seems really straightforward to me, ita !. What are they not getting?
Yeah, I think I understand what you're talking about but maybe I'm making a lot of assumptions based on my own experience. Maybe it's just the lack of context that is the stumbling block? Even if the context is not relevant to the requirements?
Maybe people aren't sure which subset of users they belong to?
Ginger wins. Quick, give her command of a starship.
only 11 and I am HUNgry. I have healthy frozen meal options in the freezer, but am craving something else. Not sure what. Probably a fried food sampler platter, but that may not be the best idea. thoughts? suggestions?
What are they not getting?
Unfortunately, as much as I beg, no one will give me that much detail. And the context that keeps being sent around to flesh out my insufficient documentation is 80% inapplicable to my system. So I consider *it* confusing, not me.
Maybe people aren't sure which subset of users they belong to?
No, it's not even that. I mean, the real life examples are so simple, that's part of why I feel like going into that detail is condescending (basically, the new users aren't allowed to see the pay details of the old users, and vice versa). Boom. End of story.
The temptation to "accidentally" slip Ginger's explanation in is quite tempting. I already have "genre geek" branded on my forehead (my boss won't even use the phrase "twilight zone" without *literally* nodding in my direction), so what would be the harm?
