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

Re: [!! SPAM] Re: [scrumdevelopment] Letting attacks go unchallenged

Expand Messages
  • Steve Ropa
    Silly, yet very frustrating. I do love your example of chefs not cooks though. From: Dan Rawsthorne Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 12:01 PM To:
    Message 1 of 76 , Feb 1, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Silly, yet very frustrating.  I do love your example of chefs not cooks though. 
      Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 12:01 PM
      Subject: Re: [!! SPAM] Re: [scrumdevelopment] Letting attacks go unchallenged

       

      Well, that's just silly, isn't it? Mike's book on user stories doesn't
      use that form, and it's the best known book on user stories. It's not in
      any of the early XP books, for example... oh, well, people like their
      recipes... when I teach scrum I teach, explicitly, that there are no
      recipes - that we are chefs, not cooks, and that we have to deal with
      the ingredients we have.

      Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, CST
      Senior Coach, Danube Technologies
      dan@..., 425-269-8628

      Steve Ropa wrote:

      >
      >
      > You know, I keep
      seeing items in the wider press that scrum can be too
      > dogmatic. I just
      wonder, is it really *scrum* that is dogmatic, or is
      > it the approach
      that we, as a broad generalization, are taking. For
      > instance, I have
      seen some of the most amusing stories twisted around
      > only so that they
      can fit the "As a ___, I can ___ so that___" model.
      > Would it really
      have ended life as we know it if the story did not
      > meet that form? And
      yes, I've even seen people insist on rejecting
      > stories that don't
      follow the form....
      >
      > Steve
      >
      > *From:*
      href="mailto:Thomasjeffreyandersontwin%40Gmail.com">Thomasjeffreyanders ontwin@Gmail. com
      > <mailto:
      href="mailto:Thomasjeffreyandersontwin%40Gmail.com">Thomasjeffreyanders ontwin@Gmail. com>
      >
      *Sent:* Monday, February 01, 2010 10:07 AM
      > *To:*
      href="mailto:scrumdevelopment%40yahoogroups.com">scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
      > <mailto:
      href="mailto:scrumdevelopment%40yahoogroups.com">scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com>
      >
      *Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Letting attacks go unchallenged
      >
      >
      >
      > I thinking statements like
      bullshit don't do much to move any debate
      > forward.
      >
      >
      Corey, how about some adult language?
      >
      > But I get the feeling
      that scrum can be a little dogmatic, and the 2
      > day CSM course just bugs
      me. I think scrum is a good way to get
      > started in agile, and that is
      how it should be presented, with
      > pointers to other things once you are
      ready. I would also love to see
      > some evolution, but I'm not so fussed
      as long as agile practicioners
      > can get access to new materials if scrum
      stays fixed then it will
      > become less and less useful over time newer
      techniques get introduced.
      >
      > Jeff Anderson
      >
      agileconsulting. blogspot. com <http://agileconsult ing.blogspot. com>
      >
      >
      >
      On Feb 1, 2010, at 8:13 AM, "mel" <mel.pullen@ntlworld .com
      > <mailto:
      href="mailto:mel.pullen%40ntlworld.com">mel.pullen@ntlworld .com>> wrote:
      >
      >>
      >>
      >> I was reading this post on
      Availagility
      >> <
      href="http://availagility.co.uk/2008/11/26/kanban-and-the-new-new-product-development-game/">http://availagility .co.uk/2008/ 11/26/kanban- and-the-new- new-product- development- game/>
      >> about the seminal article, "The new new product development
      game".
      >>
      >> This comment by Corey Ladas stands
      out:
      >>
      >> "I forgot how much bullshit had been added by the
      CSM crowd"
      >>
      >> I've just finished Corey's book called
      Scrum-Ban. In that he adds a
      >> lot of structure to the development
      process, that may be appropriate
      >> to software development and that
      requires interpretation by
      >> technically competent people. I think
      this comment in the book is
      >> telling:
      >>
      >> "If
      you refuse to take responsibility for sequencing the work, then I
      >>
      will"
      >>
      >> He calls this the /developer's natural authority/.
      To my mind, the
      >> priesthood of traditional software development
      shops is what got
      >> businesses into the mess they are with managing
      dynamic projects in
      >> the first place.
      >>
      >> So,
      he's taken as a starting point the distillation of agile project
      >>
      control that is scrum and added structure.
      >>
      >> I believe
      Scrum has the absolute minimum to give management the
      >> confidence
      projects are moving forward. It is my opinion that, by not
      >>
      prescribing how the various events get done allows Scrum to be used
      >>
      in many other areas that software development. Even product development.
      >>
      >> I think that there are many tools,
      techniques and practices that work
      >> extremely well inside Scrum,
      depending upon the project that is being
      >>
      controlled.
      >>
      >> So, what do people think? Should the Scrum
      community respond or
      >> ignore? Should Scrum evolve the way that
      critics suggest or the way
      >> practitioners
      suggest?
      >>
      >> Apologies if people get bounces from the email
      address that Yahoo
      >> groups think I use. For some reason I can't
      change it. I suppose the
      >> simplest thing would be to create a new
      account. Use mel at our
      >> domain, which is scrumit.co.uk <
      href="http://scrumit.co.uk">http://scrumit. co.uk>
      >>
      >>
      >

    • Peter Stevens (calendar)
      ... Why does a wardrobe malfunction produce a massive emotional response
      Message 76 of 76 , Feb 7, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment


        Doesn't it seem a bit disproportionate, though? It does to me. I too
        am curious what aspect of the human condition causes us to attribute
        so much power to these words. The word "fuck" for example - though it
        has an accepted definition in common use its meaning is entirely
        contextual. It doesn't even convey a useful concept, therefore. So,
        why is its presence in speech (or writing) so important to us?

        _,_.___



        Why does a "wardrobe malfunction" produce a massive emotional response including congressional investigations? Beats me. Probably has something to do with the Puritans and maybe that repression amplifies the response.

        Having said that, I do live in a less prudish part of the world (more sex on TV, more tolerance for public nudism, less sensitivity to obscene language). Even here, scatological references don't have much place in public discourse - you might occasionally hear 'Scheisse' from a politician's mouth, but it's an exception.

        An interesting question is why modesty developed, why it lives on, and whether it will survive the Internet. It seems pretty deeply rooted, but I think that question belongs on a different list...

        Cheers,
        Peter
        -- 
        Peter Stevens, CSM, CSPO, CSP
        www.scrum-breakfast.com
        tel: +41 44 586 6450 
        
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.