ObFedoraContent: I have now permanently retired the Fedora 7 and Fedora 8 sections of my repository. As I mentioned a few nights ago, those with older releases should really consider upgrading to a supported release or move to RHEL/CentOS. Cheers.
Skip the rest if you’re only wanting things Linux/Fedora related. I don’t mind ?
Most of this is the standard “if you do this in an official capacity identify yourself appropriately and don’t disparage the company” wording you’d expect to see from business and that is fair enough.
However, the verbal flotsam around unofficial personal usage is both hilarious and worrying all at once:
They are required to complete an accreditation process and undergo training to update their “knowledge on emerging social trends and evolving best practice in social media”.
This coming from Telstra, whom Australians know understand very little aside taking their subscriber’s money and providing poor to no service? It’s like getting lessons in etiquette from a hillbilly. It will keep the many Brazil-like layers of middle mismanagement there busy for maybe a week, most of it time to discuss forming a committee to investigate the feasibility of research into the impact of such social media.
A difficult aspect of the guidelines to enforce is the section governing the use of the sites in a personal capacity. If the employee refers to Telstra, they are expected to identify themselves as an employee of the company and ensure they do not imply they are authorised to speak on Telstra’s behalf. “Use a permanent disclaimer if you are referring regularly to Telstra or Telstra-related issues,” the guidelines specify.
Again I think Captain Obvious comes to the rescue here. In this country almost no one has a good word to say about Telstra. If it’s critical it’s sure as hell not officially sanctioned making disclaimers redundant. If it’s positive (and not a press release or prank) then I’d be checking out my window for four shifty characters on horseback.
Asking the poor sods slaving for Telstra to have to publicly out themselves as such seems a bit cruel and unusual ?
And frankly a) what right does a company have to influence the personal views of their employees in such a manner anyway and b) are their management / PR / media people such sensitive flowers that any sort of criticism needs to be suppressed in such a manner? (Overtly or otherwise – noone’s going to mention them if some lame disclaimer is mandated!) My $DEITY people! The rod up your arses must have rods up their arses! A good corporate culture needs constructive criticism and open debate if it’s going to go anywhere…
Fortunately I am not a Telstra employee, nor have I played one on TV (I am however tempted to play one on Twitter for the ironic value)
I have however had the misfortune of working for a company whom Telstra outsourced to (sort of; we took over one of their online divisions, my team effectively making several disgruntled DBAs effectively redundant) so I can say this just as I want to:
Telstra: You couldn’t get a clue if you were in a room full of in-heat clues covered in clue musk. The Peter Principle really wasn’t meant to be used as a management KPI but you’ve managed to do just that and the poor serfs underneath them are treated like expendable worker drones. Trying to counsel them on media relations is insulting to their intelligence as your PR/Marketing has treated the public like morons for years. Don’t pee on my foot and tell me it’s raining. Thanks.
Oh, we know why you’re doing it, don’t tell us it’s not about Fake Stephen Conroy. ? If Leslie Nasser hadn’t done it someone would have – we’ve all been completely Stephen Conroy after about a dozen schooners and a couple of shots. Don’t look so surprised.
Don’t deny the public some potentially comic genius from employees and – more importantly – what really happens within the effective monopoly telco in my great land.