Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Valid uses of this list (was: RUP and Agile)

Expand Messages
  • MICHAEL SAHOTA
    Ken, you know that everyone has the utmost respect for you. I know from training with you that you know that a sheepdog is better off giving up on some things
    Message 1 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Ken, you know that everyone has the utmost respect for you.  I know from training with you that you know that a sheepdog is better off giving up on some things rather than ending up a dead sheep dog.  The team (scrum users) are part of the larger organization (software developers) and it is of benefit to the team to keep a healthy relation with the rest of the organization (think company picnic).

      Right now, this is a vibrant and thoughtful mailing list that has moved from the narrow focus of Scrum to the wider focus of how do we ship great software with Scrum.  IMHO, it is valuable to talk about other methodologies and how Scrum relates to them.  It is valuable to talk about how other concepts can complement Scrum.

      For my part I agree that methodology discussions that do not relate to Scrum need to be carried on elsewhere.  That's fair, and I think that most people on this group would completely support that.  e.g. A thread "RUP and Agile" clearly belongs elsewhere. 

      With regard to enforcement, perhaps it would be good to agree as a community who believe in Scrum as what the guidelines and policy (maybe three strikes, you're out).  I know it is possible to achieve your stated objectives and maintain the openness and vibrancy of this group with a more communal and graded approach.  How we act determines the shape of our future. 

      Ken, as our ScrumMaster, I am asking you to engage your team (this list) to have them decide how they want to manage deal with the predators.

      ----- Original Message ----
      From: Ken Schwaber <ken.schwaber@...>
      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Friday, December 1, 2006 8:17:31 AM
      Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

      Another short thought. For those of you who are ScrumMasters, is your job to remove impediments and to stop predators from detracting the team from its mission?

      Ken

       


      From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Ken Schwaber
      Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 7:43 AM
      To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
      Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

       

      I have heard a rising number of complaints from people trying to learn how to use Scrum that this egroup seems geared toward discussions between experts, and often not about Scrum. I have invited the people who want to have methodology discussions to form a separate group to do so. The didn’t, but continued to use this group. As moderator, I am responsible for the integrity of this group to its stated purpose – exchange of information about how to use Scrum.

       

      I have to work with methodologists quite a bit, already. This egroup, however, is not the forum for that.

       

      I don’t believe that keeping to an agenda, keeping a focus, and being responsible for integrity is command and control. I believe that it is part and parcel of leadership, which I intend to do.

       

      Ken

       


      From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelo pment@yahoogroup s.com ] On Behalf Of David Morash
      Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:13 PM
      To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

       

      Holy command and control, the Emperor has no clothes! Seriously, if
      Scott was banned, I can't see how that fits with scrum principles, the
      focus on people as creators, i.e. they are thinking creative beings, not
      'resources' that do as they are told.

      To be honest, my lowly opinion about this situation is that sometimes
      agile thought leaders have to fight the tide of methodologists pitching
      what they may truly believe in. Big deal, not a tough cross to bear. I'm
      sure some of these agile thought leaders pitched methodologies in the
      past, and truly believed in them. I'd rather hear everybody's opinion
      and make up my own mind. I don't want people thinking for me, it pisses
      me off.

      Michael Vizdos wrote:

      > Scott is banned. And there is one moderator of this list. His list.
      >
      > Sigh.
      >
      > - mike
      > www.implementingscr um.com <http://www.implemen tingscrum. com>


    • Alex Pukinskis
      I¹m conflicted about this whole thing. I understand Ken¹s desire to keep the list useful for people new to Scrum. However, one of the things a new
      Message 2 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Re: [scrumdevelopment] Valid uses of this list (was: RUP and Agile) I’m conflicted about this whole thing.  I understand Ken’s desire to keep the list useful for people new to Scrum.  However, one of the things a new ScrumMaster in a large organization has to do is to help others understand Scrum.  The question about RUP and Agile provided several pieces of information to a new person:

        • RUP and Agile seem similar at first glance
        • Many RUP advocates think that they’re basically the same thing, or that RUP can be agile
        • Many in the Scrum community feel there’s an enormous, fundamental difference in values between the two approaches
        • Asserting that difference isn’t very effective in convincing the RUP people
        • Sometimes, to some people, the differences between Scrum and other iterative approaches are non-obvious.

        To me, it seems the experience of watching this discussion on this list was definitely valuable to a new person who’s going to have to explain Scrum to people with RUP experience.

        One of the things I’ve learned in five years of helping people with Agile development is that different people require different explanations to “get” what agile means.  An eager development lead needs a different explanation than a busy product manager.   Cutting off discussions doesn’t seem like a productive way of helping people understand Scrum.

        I wonder if these comments are appropriate for this community, or whether I’ll be banned too?  Is this discussion too “methodological”?  Isn’t organizational process change always related to methodology anyway?

        I guess we’ll find out.

        -Alex


        On 12 01 2006 7:14 AM, "MICHAEL SAHOTA" <sahotam@...> wrote:

        Ken, you know that everyone has the utmost respect for you.  I know from training with you that you know that a sheepdog is better off giving up on some things rather than ending up a dead sheep dog.  The team (scrum users) are part of the larger organization (software developers) and it is of benefit to the team to keep a healthy relation with the rest of the organization (think company picnic).

        Right now, this is a vibrant and thoughtful mailing list that has moved from the narrow focus of Scrum to the wider focus of how do we ship great software with Scrum.  IMHO, it is valuable to talk about other methodologies and how Scrum relates to them.  It is valuable to talk about how other concepts can complement Scrum.

        For my part I agree that methodology discussions that do not relate to Scrum need to be carried on elsewhere.  That's fair, and I think that most people on this group would completely support that.  e.g. A thread "RUP and Agile" clearly belongs elsewhere.  

        With regard to enforcement, perhaps it would be good to agree as a community who believe in Scrum as what the guidelines and policy (maybe three strikes, you're out).   I know it is possible to achieve your stated objectives and maintain the openness and vibrancy of this group with a more communal and graded approach.  How we act determines the shape of our future.  

        Ken, as our ScrumMaster, I am asking you to engage your team (this list) to have them decide how they want to manage deal with the predators.

        ----- Original Message ----
        From: Ken Schwaber <ken.schwaber@...>
        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, December 1, 2006 8:17:31 AM
        Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

         
         

        Another short thought. For those of you who are ScrumMasters, is your job to remove impediments and to stop predators from detracting the team from its mission?

        Ken

         


        From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Ken Schwaber
        Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 7:43 AM
        To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
        Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

         

        I have heard a rising number of complaints from people trying to learn how to use Scrum that this egroup seems geared toward discussions between experts, and often not about Scrum. I have invited the people who want to have methodology discussions to form a separate group to do so. The didn’t, but continued to use this group. As moderator, I am responsible for the integrity of this group to its stated purpose – exchange of information about how to use Scrum.

         

        I have to work with methodologists quite a bit, already. This egroup, however, is not the forum for that.

         

        I don’t believe that keeping to an agenda, keeping a focus, and being responsible for integrity is command and control. I believe that it is part and parcel of leadership, which I intend to do.

         

        Ken

         


        From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelo pment@yahoogroup s.com ] On Behalf Of David Morash
        Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:13 PM
        To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
        Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

         

        Holy command and control, the Emperor has no clothes! Seriously, if
        Scott was banned, I can't see how that fits with scrum principles, the
        focus on people as creators, i.e. they are thinking creative beings, not
        'resources' that do as they are told.

        To be honest, my lowly opinion about this situation is that sometimes
        agile thought leaders have to fight the tide of methodologists pitching
        what they may truly believe in. Big deal, not a tough cross to bear. I'm
        sure some of these agile thought leaders pitched methodologies in the
        past, and truly believed in them. I'd rather hear everybody's opinion
        and make up my own mind. I don't want people thinking for me, it pisses
        me off.

        Michael Vizdos wrote:
        > Scott is banned. And there is one moderator of this list. His list.
        >
        > Sigh.
        >
        > - mike
        > www.implementingscr um.com <http://www.implemen tingscrum. com <http://www.implementingscrum.com> >

         
          



      • Jeff L
        ... I too get a lot of mileage out of reading these discussions. I think it s a bit odd to promote a method that claims to be best used in concert with other
        Message 3 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- MICHAEL SAHOTA <sahotam@...> wrote:
          > IMHO, it is valuable to talk about other methodologies and how
          > Scrum relates to them. It is valuable to talk about how other
          > concepts can complement Scrum.

          I too get a lot of mileage out of reading these discussions. I think
          it's a bit odd to promote a method that claims to be best used in
          concert with other (engineering) methods, yet shun "methodologists"
          and any discussion that explores Scrum's relationship (or not) with
          other methods such as RUP.

          > For my part I agree that methodology discussions that do
          > not relate to Scrum need to be carried on elsewhere.
          > That's fair, and I think that most people on this group
          > would completely support that.

          I'd believe that there was interest in promoting discussions
          elsewhere, except for the fact that someone was lambasted for even
          mentioning another forum.

          > Ken, as our ScrumMaster, I am asking you to engage your team
          > (this list) to have them decide how they want to manage deal
          > with the predators.

          I've noted a lot of hostile terms on this list recently to describe
          things and people: "predator," "indentured servitude," "theft,"
          "plagiarism," and so on. I find this unfortunate.

          Jeff Langr
          http://langrsoft.com
          Agile Java: Crafting Code With Test-Driven Development
        • Clinton Keith
          ... Jeff L wrote ... I support it. The explosion of religious discussions that arise from things like RUP, AUP, WTF, etc create noise with respect to the
          Message 4 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- MICHAEL SAHOTA <sahotam@...> wrote:
            >> IMHO, it is valuable to talk about other methodologies and how
            >> Scrum relates to them. It is valuable to talk about how other
            >> concepts can complement Scrum.

            Jeff L wrote
            > I too get a lot of mileage out of reading these discussions. I
            > think it's a bit odd to promote a method that claims to be best
            > used in concert with other (engineering) methods, yet shun
            > "methodologists" and any discussion that explores Scrum's
            > relationship (or not) with other methods such as RUP.

            > For my part I agree that methodology discussions that do
            > not relate to Scrum need to be carried on elsewhere.
            > That's fair, and I think that most people on this group
            > would completely support that.

            I support it. The explosion of religious discussions that arise from
            things like RUP, AUP, WTF, etc create noise with respect to the scope of
            this list:
            "For updates and interchange between the users of Scrum and those just
            beginning to use Scrum. Restricted to those who want to build products
            and software using Scrum. For discussion on how to do so. Not for
            methodologists, but for practitioners."

            I joined for this narrow focus. There are plenty of lists where one can
            hear the debates in full.

            A good Scrum Master will put a halt to discussions that start to drift
            outside the scope of the daily Scrum. The role of a moderator on a list
            with a stated scope is similar.

            Clint
          • Jeff Langr
            ... I too joined it to figure out how to build products and software using Scrum, and discussion on how to do so. Unfortunately, since Scrum answers only
            Message 5 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Quoting Clinton Keith <ckeith@...>:
              > I support it. The explosion of religious discussions that arise from
              > things like RUP, AUP, WTF, etc create noise with respect to the scope of
              > this list:
              > "For updates and interchange between the users of Scrum and those just
              > beginning to use Scrum. Restricted to those who want to build products
              > and software using Scrum. For discussion on how to do so. Not for
              > methodologists, but for practitioners."
              >
              > I joined for this narrow focus. There are plenty of lists where one can
              > hear the debates in full.

              I too joined it to figure out how to "build products and software
              using Scrum," and "discussion on how to do so." Unfortunately, since
              Scrum answers only part of the challenge, such discussion would
              necessarily need to involve other process. Not religious debate, mind
              you, but open discussion about techniques.

              As an example, I appreciated Ambler's posting of an article where
              someone discussed how they were able to mesh Scrum and RUP ideas--a
              potential practical solution. That was a response to Mr Schwaber's
              statement that that RUP and Scrum are contrary, not mappable. Which I
              think is an emphatic and religious methodologist's stance, not one of
              someone trying to figure out how to make things work.

              Jeff Langr
              http://langrsoft.com
              Agile Java, Crafting Code With Test-Driven Development
            • Ron Jeffries
              Hello, Clinton. On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 12:34:45 PM, you ... What happened to that self-organization thing? Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com New and
              Message 6 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Hello, Clinton. On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 12:34:45 PM, you
                wrote:

                > A good Scrum Master will put a halt to discussions that start to drift
                > outside the scope of the daily Scrum. The role of a moderator on a list
                > with a stated scope is similar.

                What happened to that self-organization thing?

                Ron Jeffries
                www.XProgramming.com
                New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled,
                the humiliating question arises, "Why then are you not taking part in
                them?" -- H. G. Wells
              • Ken Schwaber
                Geez, Alex, I d remove you from the list but you are bigger than me!! Seriously. the people who were removed from this list had never used Scrum before on a
                Message 7 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                • 0 Attachment

                  Geez, Alex, I’d remove you from the list but you are bigger than me!!

                   

                  Seriously… the people who were removed from this list had never used Scrum before on a project and weren’t event CSM’s. Yet, they persisted in methodological discussions. Worse, all of them came from companies that were paying them to advance alternative visions of Scrum, where it would be parsed and made available to our profession with their spin. I remember the SEI/CMM people asking me 5 years ago how I was going to avoid Scrum and Agile getting trashed the way CMM was when the companies that could make a lot of money from it discovered how to “productize” it to their commercial advantage.

                   

                  When we met in Snowbird and developed the manifesto, one of our desires was to create a stark, obvious alternative to RUP. RUP was getting a lot of traction, making a lot of money for Rational, and making a lot of developers miserable as it was implemented on top of their heads. The manifesto is written so it doesn’t take a very bright person to discern that RUP isn’t Agile. We don’t need to have the hundredth discussion of it here.

                   

                  I reiterate. This group is for people that want to talk about Scrum as they are trying to figure out how to use it … whether beginner or advanced. The idea is we all pitch in and help each other. Other groups will undoubtedly serve other purposes better. We need to watch the Scrum community and movement as people who don’t even understand it try to make money from it.

                   

                  Many of us (maybe all) that use Scrum are tired of being told what to do regarding our profession, mostly because the instructions are wrong, painful, and ruin our workday. This is why self-management and responsibility with authority appeal to us so much. It also makes all of us really sensitive to heavy-handedness and arbitrary decisions. We are fearful that they aren’t to our benefit. When you view any actions that I take, I’d like you to view them in light of what I have tried to do and accomplished so far for the good and advancement of our profession and the Scrum community … sometimes I’ve been stupid and even dead wrong, but my intentions have always been good and the overall accomplishments that I and we together have made have been impressive. Finally, there is a viable alternative to waterfall and our customers don’t throw rocks at us.

                   

                  Before those that were delisted were delisted, I gave them about six months with frequent requests to stick to the point. I hope that this community is as kind to me and in how my intentions are judged.

                   

                  Ken

                   


                  From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Alex Pukinskis
                  Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 10:50 AM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com ; MICHAEL SAHOTA
                  Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Valid uses of this list (was: RUP and Agile)

                   

                  Im conflicted about this whole thing.  I understand Kens desire to keep the list useful for people new to Scrum.  However, one of the things a new ScrumMaster in a large organization has to do is to help others understand Scrum.  The question about RUP and Agile provided several pieces of information to a new person:

                  • RUP and Agile seem similar at first glance
                  • Many RUP advocates think that theyre basically the same thing, or that RUP can be agile
                  • Many in the Scrum community feel theres an enormous, fundamental difference in values between the two approaches
                  • Asserting that difference isnt very effective in convincing the RUP people
                  • Sometimes, to some people, the differences between Scrum and other iterative approaches are non-obvious.


                  To me, it seems the experience of watching this discussion on this list was definitely valuable to a new person who
                  s going to have to explain Scrum to people with RUP experience.

                  One of the things I
                  ve learned in five years of helping people with Agile development is that different people require different explanations to get what agile means.  An eager development lead needs a different explanation than a busy product manager.   Cutting off discussions doesnt seem like a productive way of helping people understand Scrum.

                  I wonder if these comments are appropriate for this community, or whether I
                  ll be banned too?  Is this discussion too methodological?  Isnt organizational process change always related to methodology anyway?

                  I guess we
                  ll find out.

                  -Alex


                  On 12 01 2006 7:14 AM, "MICHAEL SAHOTA" <sahotam@rogers. com> wrote:

                  Ken, you know that everyone has the utmost respect for you.  I know from training with you that you know that a sheepdog is better off giving up on some things rather than ending up a dead sheep dog.  The team (scrum users) are part of the larger organization (software developers) and it is of benefit to the team to keep a healthy relation with the rest of the organization (think company picnic).

                  Right now, this is a vibrant and thoughtful mailing list that has moved from the narrow focus of Scrum to the wider focus of how do we ship great software with Scrum.
                   IMHO, it is valuable to talk about other methodologies and how Scrum relates to them.  It is valuable to talk about how other concepts can complement Scrum.

                  For my part I agree that methodology discussions that do not relate to Scrum need to be carried on elsewhere.
                   That's fair, and I think that most people on this group would completely support that.  e.g. A thread "RUP and Agile" clearly belongs elsewhere.  

                  With regard to enforcement, perhaps it would be good to agree as a community who believe in Scrum as what the guidelines and policy (maybe three strikes, you're out).
                    I know it is possible to achieve your stated objectives and maintain the openness and vibrancy of this group with a more communal and graded approach.  How we act determines the shape of our future.  

                  Ken, as our ScrumMaster, I am asking you to engage your team (this list) to have them decide how they want to manage deal with the predators.

                  ----- Original Message ----
                  From: Ken Schwaber <ken.schwaber@ verizon.net>
                  To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                  Sent: Friday, December 1, 2006 8:17:31 AM
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

                   
                   

                  Another short thought. For those of you who are ScrumMasters, is your job to remove impediments and to stop predators from detracting the team from its mission?

                  Ken

                   


                  From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Ken Schwaber
                  Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 7:43 AM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

                   

                  I have heard a rising number of complaints from people trying to learn how to use Scrum that this egroup seems geared toward discussions between experts, and often not about Scrum. I have invited the people who want to have methodology discussions to form a separate group to do so. The didnt, but continued to use this group. As moderator, I am responsible for the integrity of this group to its stated purpose exchange of information about how to use Scrum.

                   

                  I have to work with methodologists quite a bit, already. This egroup, however, is not the forum for that.

                   

                  I dont believe that keeping to an agenda, keeping a focus, and being responsible for integrity is command and control. I believe that it is part and parcel of leadership, which I intend to do.

                   

                  Ken

                   


                  From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelo pment@yahoogroup s.com ] On Behalf Of David Morash
                  Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:13 PM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                  Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile

                   

                  Holy command and control, the Emperor has no clothes! Seriously, if
                  Scott was banned, I can't see how that fits with scrum principles, the
                  focus on people as creators, i.e. they are thinking creative beings, not
                  'resources' that do as they are told.

                  To be honest, my lowly opinion about this situation is that sometimes
                  agile thought leaders have to fight the tide of methodologists pitching
                  what they may truly believe in. Big deal, not a tough cross to bear. I'm
                  sure some of these agile thought leaders pitched methodologies in the
                  past, and truly believed in them. I'd rather hear everybody's opinion
                  and make up my own mind. I don't want people thinking for me, it pisses
                  me off.

                  Michael Vizdos wrote:

                  > Scott is banned. And there is one moderator of this list. His list.
                  >
                  > Sigh.
                  >
                  > - mike
                  > www.implementingscr um.com
                  href="http://www.implemen%20tingscrum.%20com%20%3chttp:/www.implementingscrum.com"><http://www.implemen tingscrum. com <http://www.implemen tingscrum. com> >

                   
                    

                   

                • Ken Schwaber
                  Rom . All self-organization is bounded. I often compare Scrum to chess, or even rugby. Scrum sets forth the rules within which the game is played;
                  Message 8 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment

                    Rom …

                    All self-organization is bounded. I often compare Scrum to chess, or even rugby. Scrum sets forth the rules within which the game is played; self-organization happens within that frame-work. Otherwise you have chaos, not complexity.

                     


                    From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Ron Jeffries
                    Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 1:06 PM
                    To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Valid uses of this list (was: RUP and Agile)

                     

                    Hello, Clinton . On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 12:34:45 PM, you
                    wrote:

                    > A good Scrum Master will put a halt to discussions that start to drift
                    > outside the scope of the daily Scrum. The role of a moderator on a list
                    > with a stated scope is similar.

                    What happened to that self-organization thing?

                    Ron Jeffries
                    www.XProgramming. com
                    New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled,
                    the humiliating question arises, "Why then are you not taking part in
                    them?" -- H. G. Wells

                  • Ken Schwaber
                    Geez, Alex, I d remove you from the list but you are bigger than me!! Seriously… the people who were removed from this list had never used Scrum before on a
                    Message 9 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Geez, Alex, I'd remove you from the list but you are bigger than me!!

                      Seriously… the people who were removed from this list had never used
                      Scrum before on a project and weren't event CSM's. Yet, they persisted
                      in methodological discussions. Worse, all of them came from companies
                      that were paying them to advance alternative visions of Scrum, where
                      it would be parsed and made available to our profession with their
                      spin. I remember the SEI/CMM people asking me 5 years ago how I was
                      going to avoid Scrum and Agile getting trashed the way CMM was when
                      the companies that could make a lot of money from it discovered how to
                      "productize" it to their commercial advantage.

                      When we met in Snowbird and developed the manifesto, one of our
                      desires was to create a stark, obvious alternative to RUP. RUP was
                      getting a lot of traction, making a lot of money for Rational, and
                      making a lot of developers miserable as it was implemented on top of
                      their heads. The manifesto is written so it doesn't take a very bright
                      person to discern that RUP isn't Agile. We don't need to have the
                      hundredth discussion of it here.

                      I reiterate. This group is for people that want to talk about Scrum as
                      they are trying to figure out how to use it … whether beginner or
                      advanced. The idea is we all pitch in and help each other. Other
                      groups will undoubtedly serve other purposes better. We need to watch
                      the Scrum community and movement as people who don't even understand
                      it try to make money from it.

                      Many of us (maybe all) that use Scrum are tired of being told what to
                      do regarding our profession, mostly because the instructions are
                      wrong, painful, and ruin our workday. This is why self-management and
                      responsibility with authority appeal to us so much. It also makes all
                      of us really sensitive to heavy-handedness and arbitrary decisions. We
                      are fearful that they aren't to our benefit. When you view any actions
                      that I take, I'd like you to view them in light of what I have tried
                      to do and accomplished so far for the good and advancement of our
                      profession and the Scrum community … sometimes I've been stupid and
                      even dead wrong, but my intentions have always been good and the
                      overall accomplishments that I and we together have made have been
                      impressive. Finally, there is a viable alternative to waterfall and
                      our customers don't throw rocks at us.

                      Before those that were delisted were delisted, I gave them about six
                      months with frequent requests to stick to the point. I hope that this
                      community is as kind to me and in how my intentions are judged.



                      Ken



                      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Alex Pukinskis
                      <Alex.Pukinskis@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > I¹m conflicted about this whole thing. I understand Ken¹s desire to
                      keep
                      > the list useful for people new to Scrum. However, one of the things
                      a new
                      > ScrumMaster in a large organization has to do is to help others
                      understand
                      > Scrum. The question about RUP and Agile provided several pieces of
                      > information to a new person:
                      >
                      > * RUP and Agile seem similar at first glance
                      > * Many RUP advocates think that they¹re basically the same thing, or
                      that
                      > RUP can be agile
                      > * Many in the Scrum community feel there¹s an enormous, fundamental
                      > difference in values between the two approaches
                      > * Asserting that difference isn¹t very effective in convincing the RUP
                      > people
                      > * Sometimes, to some people, the differences between Scrum and other
                      > iterative approaches are non-obvious.
                      >
                      > To me, it seems the experience of watching this discussion on this
                      list was
                      > definitely valuable to a new person who¹s going to have to explain
                      Scrum to
                      > people with RUP experience.
                      >
                      > One of the things I¹ve learned in five years of helping people with
                      Agile
                      > development is that different people require different explanations
                      to ³get²
                      > what agile means. An eager development lead needs a different
                      explanation
                      > than a busy product manager. Cutting off discussions doesn¹t seem
                      like a
                      > productive way of helping people understand Scrum.
                      >
                      > I wonder if these comments are appropriate for this community, or
                      whether
                      > I¹ll be banned too? Is this discussion too ³methodological²? Isn¹t
                      > organizational process change always related to methodology anyway?
                      >
                      > I guess we¹ll find out.
                      >
                      > -Alex
                      >
                      >
                      > On 12 01 2006 7:14 AM, "MICHAEL SAHOTA" <sahotam@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > > Ken, you know that everyone has the utmost respect for you. I
                      know from
                      > > training with you that you know that a sheepdog is better off
                      giving up on
                      > > some things rather than ending up a dead sheep dog. The team
                      (scrum users)
                      > > are part of the larger organization (software developers) and it
                      is of benefit
                      > > to the team to keep a healthy relation with the rest of the
                      organization
                      > > (think company picnic).
                      > >
                      > > Right now, this is a vibrant and thoughtful mailing list that has
                      moved from
                      > > the narrow focus of Scrum to the wider focus of how do we ship
                      great software
                      > > with Scrum. IMHO, it is valuable to talk about other
                      methodologies and how
                      > > Scrum relates to them. It is valuable to talk about how other
                      concepts can
                      > > complement Scrum.
                      > >
                      > > For my part I agree that methodology discussions that do not
                      relate to Scrum
                      > > need to be carried on elsewhere. That's fair, and I think that
                      most people on
                      > > this group would completely support that. e.g. A thread "RUP and
                      Agile"
                      > > clearly belongs elsewhere.
                      > >
                      > > With regard to enforcement, perhaps it would be good to agree as a
                      community
                      > > who believe in Scrum as what the guidelines and policy (maybe
                      three strikes,
                      > > you're out). I know it is possible to achieve your stated
                      objectives and
                      > > maintain the openness and vibrancy of this group with a more
                      communal and
                      > > graded approach. How we act determines the shape of our future.
                      > >
                      > > Ken, as our ScrumMaster, I am asking you to engage your team (this
                      list) to
                      > > have them decide how they want to manage deal with the predators.
                      > >
                      > > ----- Original Message ----
                      > > From: Ken Schwaber <ken.schwaber@...>
                      > > To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                      > > Sent: Friday, December 1, 2006 8:17:31 AM
                      > > Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Another short thought. For those of you who are ScrumMasters, is
                      your job to
                      > > remove impediments and to stop predators from detracting the team
                      from its
                      > > mission?
                      > >
                      > > Ken
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@
                      > > yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Ken Schwaber
                      > > Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 7:43 AM
                      > > To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                      > > Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > I have heard a rising number of complaints from people trying to
                      learn how to
                      > > use Scrum that this egroup seems geared toward discussions between
                      experts,
                      > > and often not about Scrum. I have invited the people who want to have
                      > > methodology discussions to form a separate group to do so. The
                      didn¹t, but
                      > > continued to use this group. As moderator, I am responsible for
                      the integrity
                      > > of this group to its stated purpose ­ exchange of information
                      about how to use
                      > > Scrum.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > I have to work with methodologists quite a bit, already. This
                      egroup, however,
                      > > is not the forum for that.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > I don¹t believe that keeping to an agenda, keeping a focus, and being
                      > > responsible for integrity is command and control. I believe that
                      it is part
                      > > and parcel of leadership, which I intend to do.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Ken
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelo
                      pment@yahoogroup
                      > > s.com ] On Behalf Of David Morash
                      > > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:13 PM
                      > > To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                      > > Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Holy command and control, the Emperor has no clothes! Seriously, if
                      > > Scott was banned, I can't see how that fits with scrum principles, the
                      > > focus on people as creators, i.e. they are thinking creative
                      beings, not
                      > > 'resources' that do as they are told.
                      > >
                      > > To be honest, my lowly opinion about this situation is that sometimes
                      > > agile thought leaders have to fight the tide of methodologists
                      pitching
                      > > what they may truly believe in. Big deal, not a tough cross to
                      bear. I'm
                      > > sure some of these agile thought leaders pitched methodologies in the
                      > > past, and truly believed in them. I'd rather hear everybody's opinion
                      > > and make up my own mind. I don't want people thinking for me, it
                      pisses
                      > > me off.
                      > >
                      > > Michael Vizdos wrote:
                      > >> > Scott is banned. And there is one moderator of this list. His list.
                      > >> >
                      > >> > Sigh.
                      > >> >
                      > >> > - mike
                      > >> > www.implementingscr um.com <http://www.implemen tingscrum. com
                      > >> <http://www.implementingscrum.com> <http://www.implemen
                      tingscrum. com > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • Ken Schwaber
                      Jeff … understanding the difference in the underpinnings between RUP and Agile would help you understand why they are incompatible. It is like the difference
                      Message 10 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Jeff … understanding the difference in the underpinnings between RUP
                        and Agile would help you understand why they are incompatible. It is
                        like the difference between lean and traditional manufacturing. When
                        you try to accommodate one to the other's vocabulary, etc. what
                        happens is the entire change of philosophy and resultant change in
                        action is undercut. Mapping Scrum to RUP helps nobody using Scrum and
                        helps RUP stay alive far longer than its track record would otherwise
                        support. RUP has done enough damage on its own without us providing it
                        additional legs.

                        Ken


                        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Langr <jeff@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Quoting Clinton Keith <ckeith@...>:
                        > > I support it. The explosion of religious discussions that arise from
                        > > things like RUP, AUP, WTF, etc create noise with respect to the
                        scope of
                        > > this list:
                        > > "For updates and interchange between the users of Scrum and those just
                        > > beginning to use Scrum. Restricted to those who want to build products
                        > > and software using Scrum. For discussion on how to do so. Not for
                        > > methodologists, but for practitioners."
                        > >
                        > > I joined for this narrow focus. There are plenty of lists where
                        one can
                        > > hear the debates in full.
                        >
                        > I too joined it to figure out how to "build products and software
                        > using Scrum," and "discussion on how to do so." Unfortunately, since
                        > Scrum answers only part of the challenge, such discussion would
                        > necessarily need to involve other process. Not religious debate, mind
                        > you, but open discussion about techniques.
                        >
                        > As an example, I appreciated Ambler's posting of an article where
                        > someone discussed how they were able to mesh Scrum and RUP ideas--a
                        > potential practical solution. That was a response to Mr Schwaber's
                        > statement that that RUP and Scrum are contrary, not mappable. Which I
                        > think is an emphatic and religious methodologist's stance, not one of
                        > someone trying to figure out how to make things work.
                        >
                        > Jeff Langr
                        > http://langrsoft.com
                        > Agile Java, Crafting Code With Test-Driven Development
                        >
                      • Ken Schwaber
                        Ron … All self-organization is bounded. I often compare Scrum to chess, or even rugby. Scrum sets forth the rules within which the game is played;
                        Message 11 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Ron …

                          All self-organization is bounded. I often compare Scrum to chess, or
                          even rugby. Scrum sets forth the rules within which the game is
                          played; self-organization happens within that frame-work. Otherwise
                          you have chaos, not complexity.


                          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Ron Jeffries
                          <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Hello, Clinton. On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 12:34:45 PM, you
                          > wrote:
                          >
                          > > A good Scrum Master will put a halt to discussions that start to drift
                          > > outside the scope of the daily Scrum. The role of a moderator on
                          a list
                          > > with a stated scope is similar.
                          >
                          > What happened to that self-organization thing?
                          >
                          > Ron Jeffries
                          > www.XProgramming.com
                          > New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled,
                          > the humiliating question arises, "Why then are you not taking part in
                          > them?" -- H. G. Wells
                          >
                        • Mike Cohn
                          The best description of this is still found in the Scrum section in 1990 s _Wicked Problems, Righteous Solutions_ (DeGrace and Stahl) who say: To be sure,
                          Message 12 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            The best description of this is still found in the Scrum section in 1990's _Wicked Problems, Righteous Solutions_ (DeGrace and Stahl) who say:

                            "To be sure, control _is_ [sic] still exercised; but, it is subtle and much of it is indirect. It is exercised by selecting the right people, creating an open work environment, encouraging feedback from the field, establishing an evaluation and reward system based on group performance, managing the tendency for going off in many directions early on and the need to integrate information and effort later on, tolerating and even anticipating mistakes, and encouraging suppliers to become involved early without controlling them."

                            Going back further, Takeuchi and Nonaka talk about management providing "money, moral support and guidance" to the team. Our guidance was to stay practical, not too theoretical. Ken's also provided moral support and his annual checks to each member of the group based on number of emails contributed should be coming soon. :)  Ron--you'd make a fortune!

                            Regards,

                            Mike Cohn
                            Author:
                              Agile Estimating and Planning
                              User Stories Applied
                            www.mountaingoatsoftware.com


                            On Dec 1, 2006, at 4:39 PM, Ken Schwaber wrote:

                            Ron …

                            All self-organization is bounded. I often compare Scrum to chess, or
                            even rugby. Scrum sets forth the rules within which the game is
                            played; self-organization happens within that frame-work. Otherwise
                            you have chaos, not complexity.

                            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Ron Jeffries
                            <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Hello, Clinton. On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 12:34:45 PM, you
                            > wrote:
                            >
                            > > A good Scrum Master will put a halt to discussions that start to drift
                            > > outside the scope of the daily Scrum. The role of a moderator on
                            a list
                            > > with a stated scope is similar.
                            >
                            > What happened to that self-organization thing?
                            >
                            > Ron Jeffries
                            > www.XProgramming.com
                            > New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled,
                            > the humiliating question arises, "Why then are you not taking part in
                            > them?" -- H. G. Wells
                            >


                          • Ron Jeffries
                            Hello, Mike. On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 6:59:22 PM, you ... Whee ... a replacement for my old worn out SLK ... Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com
                            Message 13 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hello, Mike. On Friday, December 1, 2006, at 6:59:22 PM, you
                              wrote:

                              > Ron--you'd make a fortune!

                              Whee ... a replacement for my old worn out SLK ...

                              Ron Jeffries
                              www.XProgramming.com
                              Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire.
                              He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to
                              light - Howard Roark (The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand)
                            • Dion Stewart
                              Wouldn t a post explaining why RUP doesn t map to Scrum have been more effective than banning people and discussing what this list is and is not for? Dion ...
                              Message 14 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Wouldn't a post explaining why RUP doesn't map to Scrum have been more effective than banning people and discussing what this list is and is not for?

                                Dion


                                On Dec 1, 2006, at 5:39 PM, Ken Schwaber wrote:

                                Jeff … understanding the difference in the underpinnings between RUP
                                and Agile would help you understand why they are incompatible. It is
                                like the difference between lean and traditional manufacturing. When
                                you try to accommodate one to the other's vocabulary, etc. what
                                happens is the entire change of philosophy and resultant change in
                                action is undercut. Mapping Scrum to RUP helps nobody using Scrum and
                                helps RUP stay alive far longer than its track record would otherwise
                                support. RUP has done enough damage on its own without us providing it
                                additional legs.

                                Ken

                              • David Morash
                                Ken, I think what you are fighting here is not an organizational fight but a cultural one. I don t know if you can win such a fight in the short term. I do see
                                Message 15 of 15 , Dec 1, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Ken, I think what you are fighting here is not an organizational fight
                                  but a cultural one. I don't know if you can win such a fight in the
                                  short term. I do see it as a principled fight and while I disagree with
                                  some of the tactics, I do appreciate the intent. I can't say that I've
                                  seen the scope of the problem as you have, and maybe that is why our
                                  viewpoints differ.


                                  Ken Schwaber wrote:
                                  > Geez, Alex, I'd remove you from the list but you are bigger than me!!
                                  >
                                  > Seriously… the people who were removed from this list had never used
                                  > Scrum before on a project and weren't event CSM's. Yet, they persisted
                                  > in methodological discussions. Worse, all of them came from companies
                                  > that were paying them to advance alternative visions of Scrum, where
                                  > it would be parsed and made available to our profession with their
                                  > spin. I remember the SEI/CMM people asking me 5 years ago how I was
                                  > going to avoid Scrum and Agile getting trashed the way CMM was when
                                  > the companies that could make a lot of money from it discovered how to
                                  > "productize" it to their commercial advantage.
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.