AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<Brian.Stark@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	E1EC65251D4B3D46BBC0AAA3C0629222AFCB6A5B@cosmail02.lsi.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:12:53 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: "Stark, Brian" <Brian.Stark@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: items for this week
Message-ID: <20091027141253.09c7b8dc@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <E1EC65251D4B3D46BBC0AAA3C0629222AFCB6A5B@cosmail02.lsi.com>
References: <20091023202321.35648c78@ripper.onstor.net>
	<E1EC65251D4B3D46BBC0AAA3C0629222AFCB6A5B@cosmail02.lsi.com>
Organization: LSI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:10:40 -0600 "Stark, Brian" <Brian.Stark@lsi.com>
wrote:

> Andy,
> 
> Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner.  The weekend was stuffed and
> then I traveled to Wichita all day yesterday.  

NP, I understand.

> On the hiring front, I don't want to hire mediocre people.  This will
> bite us eventually and I would rather spend the energy looking for
> better people.  If you already haven't, go ahead and engage with your
> recruiter if you want.

OK.

> I understand your frustration with Bill, but let me worry about the
> management side of it.  I'll talk with Bill this week since he's also
> here in Wichita.  You should focus on TuxStor, which I realize can be
> difficult, but we need to figure out how to make this happen.  We
> also need to get Max engaged, which would then be the 4th person.  I
> don't believe we're on schedule right now, and I want to make it
> crystal clear that LSI's success in NAS (and then ultimately our
> success) hinges on successfully delivering TuxStor.  From my first
> half day of meetings here, I believe TuxStor is the most important
> project within ESG right now.  
> 
> I want to let you know before I publicize to the whole group that
> Bill was just promoted to Distinguished Engineer.  This was largely
> due to his past work in the NAS space, and LSI is clearly committed
> to NAS.  I wasn't confident that it would go through the nomination
> committee because of our limited exposure within LSI.  Whether you
> agree with this or not, Bill will be looked at in a different light.  

If you expect me to still work here when you get back, perhaps you
better call me.  I'm this close to throwing Bill off this project, and
I'm -not- kidding about that.  And now this?  Just too much to take.
I've been slaving away on this project, he's be doing 5% of what he
should be, and he's getting promoted?  There's so many things wrong
with that I don't even want to waste your time listing them.  Or my
time.  Nor do I want to work at a company where do-nothing,
diarrhea-mouthed morons get promoted.  Didn't we just have this
conversation where we talked about how wrong it is that people in
engineering often get promoted to just past their level of competency?
Exactly what's happening here.

> I also want to let you know that this opportunity is open to you as
> well, but it would essentially mean choosing the technical track
> versus the management track.  Although LSI publicizes a dual career
> track, the organization covets Distinguished Engineers and doesn't
> encourage letting them move over to management.

The equivalent would be for me to get promoted to Director.  The
Manager-2 thing would be months off even if I got that started right
now.

> I attended the IT meeting on Friday and was primarily focused on
> Mightydog.  Other things came up, but I consider those secondary.  I
> found out today that no one in IT has figured out why mktg3 is not
> accessible.  That basically means that we are running a single node
> with no failover support right now.  I sent a very terse email to
> Trinh today saying this was unacceptable. 


I've been keeping notes on the wiki link I sent you of issues; the idea
is that it can be used as an agenda list at these meetings.  If
something gets resolved, I take it off.  So far, nothing has been taken
off.

http://wiki.onstor.net/wiki/IT_Issues_list


> 
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Sharp [mailto:andy.sharp@lsi.com] 
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 8:23 PM
> To: Stark, Brian
> Subject: items for this week
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> Well, I'm still trying to catch up on all the stuff I missed because
> of today's mishaps, including not having internet from about 2.30 or
> 3.00ish until about 7.30.  Today just completely sucked.
> 
> This boy Bill needs a major, serious attitude adjustment.  His
> continued public disrespect is something I'm not prepared to continue
> to absorb. I'm happy to read him the riot act, but I thought I would
> check with you first before doing so.  On top of that, I feel like I
> have 2.25 people working on tuxstor, the 2 being me and Rendell, and
> the .25 being Bill.  And I need 4.  But the huge management cycles
> Bill incurs might easily erase that .25.
> 
> I need to go over some of the candidates that have interviewed
> recently.  Possibly this is something that we can sit down and do with
> Jobi also in attendance just for perspective.  I need to get someone
> in here, I think this Robert Hudson guy is the best of a mediocre
> bunch, but just barely.  I've gotten a couple of new resumes today,
> but haven't had a chance to go over them, but I'm not holding out
> much hope.
> 
> Sorry about the IT meeting today, I hope you had a chance to attend.
> I *really* wanted and needed to attend, but I was running around like
> a chicken trying to deal with power outage and internet outage
> issues.  If I had planned it, I would have gone to a neighbor's and
> used their car to power my cell phone (battery was practically dead)
> to call in.  I managed to get to a google wifi cell in time to
> reschedule another meeting I was supposed to have this afternoon
> where they were going to attempt to brainwash me concerning
> goglobal.  Then my laptop battery got below 10%.
> 
