![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
okay, the boss is supposed to be taking it easy on account of his new ticker accessory, installed tuesday. his doctor relented on the "take it easy for five or six days" pronouncement (thanks, asshole), so the chief is back in the saddle, but not up to full speed (physically -or- mentally).
so, he walks in and immediately makes -my- BP skyrocket. i'm almost accustomed to him asking for "that letter i showed to don yesterday" most of the time, but when he's been out, and picks one hardcopy out of about 30 that i handed him seventy-six tasks and twenty-two hours ago, that's a bit of a tall order. "the one from seattle." [it was an email (postal mail would have been easier), and, once i found it, noticed that the -last- word of the sig block was, in fact "seattle."]
boss, i don't -read- all of your inbound correspondence - i'm a spam filter, not a cross-indexed inbound filing cabinet.
"what's this letter we sent to lieutenant whatsisfuck yesterday? this isn't what i wanted! i wanted you to include every piece of correspondence we've sent him in the last three months, that's not here! why wasn't it here?"
well, let's see -
1) half the shit we get from the lieutenant comes in via fax - you want me to crush his inbox with jpg's that are the scanned images of his correspondence, which he'll have on file at his end? 2) there's this concept called "beating a dead horse," with which you may be familiar. we're already pissing up his nose, it's not going to help our cause by rubbing his face in it. 3) it's not the end of the world if one letter out of twelve is missing a date - they're in chronological order, and it references appropriately. 4) you weren't exactly clear about your wishes. saying "put the stuff from his file as attachments" is not exactly a high level of precision; saying "attach all of our previous emails to him" is. the fact that you compose in longhand, edit in word, and then cut & paste into email isn't making things any less complicated.
grrrr
so, he walks in and immediately makes -my- BP skyrocket. i'm almost accustomed to him asking for "that letter i showed to don yesterday" most of the time, but when he's been out, and picks one hardcopy out of about 30 that i handed him seventy-six tasks and twenty-two hours ago, that's a bit of a tall order. "the one from seattle." [it was an email (postal mail would have been easier), and, once i found it, noticed that the -last- word of the sig block was, in fact "seattle."]
boss, i don't -read- all of your inbound correspondence - i'm a spam filter, not a cross-indexed inbound filing cabinet.
"what's this letter we sent to lieutenant whatsisfuck yesterday? this isn't what i wanted! i wanted you to include every piece of correspondence we've sent him in the last three months, that's not here! why wasn't it here?"
well, let's see -
1) half the shit we get from the lieutenant comes in via fax - you want me to crush his inbox with jpg's that are the scanned images of his correspondence, which he'll have on file at his end? 2) there's this concept called "beating a dead horse," with which you may be familiar. we're already pissing up his nose, it's not going to help our cause by rubbing his face in it. 3) it's not the end of the world if one letter out of twelve is missing a date - they're in chronological order, and it references appropriately. 4) you weren't exactly clear about your wishes. saying "put the stuff from his file as attachments" is not exactly a high level of precision; saying "attach all of our previous emails to him" is. the fact that you compose in longhand, edit in word, and then cut & paste into email isn't making things any less complicated.
grrrr
