Why do you think it's bullshit and why do you think it's humiliation?
Aren't all employees, in all companies on this planet, submitting to some form of dominance in exchange for money?
Aren't all employees, in all companies on this planet, submitting to some form of dominance in exchange for money?
He usually has very accurate inside information.
You'd probably say no, because his request is way over the line; to me having a jerkoff know-nothing telling me "Print your work and I'll judge whether you're worth it or not" is over my line.
0) It keeps me (the CEO) humble 1) It weeds out the prima-donnas 3) It develops respect, everyone leaves the toilet better than they found it
- lunch shopping and preparations, clean up
- transport from one branch to another for Factory Acceptance Testing
- at one point I worked as a consultant for a rather large Norwegian company and one thing I noted was the the most senior leader I ever saw in that company (that I was aware if at least) was also one of those I remember who would make sure to tidy the kitchen and make sure everything went into the dishwasher
If you interviewed at a company and got told "Every quarter, the know-nothing jerkoff CEO wants to see 50 printed pages of your code", and you accepted the job, hey, you've accepted that this is the norm in that company...
Everybody wants to think they’re Andy Hertzfeld, but generally speaking for a whole lot of people not being able to show their productivity in a very simple way means they’re unproductive.
No, this is completely nuts! It encourages all sorts of pathological behavior to fake the metric, and throws the thing you might actually care about - business value - under the bus. It's even worse for senior people and those with architectural responsibilities. Spend time helping a junior on your team? Well, that's going to count under his commit metric and not yours, so he can figure it out himself.
My point is that if your productivity can be easily measured by LOC, then don’t tell me that LOC is a bad metric.
If your duties are mentoring, show me the meetings you had, the action items from those meetings, and what changed as a result. Nearly every job’s productivity can be showed in a pretty simple way. It’s the people who argue that their contribution can’t be simply shown that are often not that productive.
OK, so, I fundamentally disagree with the if condition.
This is in no small because of a previous coworker, in a place that shall not be named, who regularly duplicated entire class files rather than subclassing them, and his given argument when we challenged him on this was that he "couldn't subclass because the access specifiers were set to private" (yes really his defence was that bad).
Worse, I'd already added some "TODO: deduplicate this method" comments to the original, because the original was already a mess of copypasta code, and the new class duplicated all of these too.
So, a lot of new LOC that day, but none of them were good additions.
I think of metrics like this as a way to guide deeper looks and decision making. You just have to accept that “all models are wrong, but some models are useful.” LOC can be useful when it guides you to the right questions. It’s a starting point not the end of the conversation.
I think what's being criticised is when its used as a direct scoring system (e.g. bonus = k * LOC).
> Equal service at the end of the day
> But I know what you think, you thought
> 'Cause you've got the Ps, the ball's in your court, but it ain't
JME - The Money