Are all of your questions rhetorical? Or would the answers to them change whether you think Clemans should have been fired on the spot? If any of those answers

Are all of your questions rhetorical? Or would the answers to them change whether you think Clemans should have been fired on the spot? If any of those answers were any different than what I expect they are, it would have required the participation of the larger IT apparatus at the SPD. In which case, his boss probably would have been suspended as well. Would it matter that, as badly as Clemans may have behaved, he was significantly better than the other IT staff that worked in the centre? better? That is positively dripping in thoughtless elitism. But for the sake of argument, better than the other IT staff who worked with their superiors to define solutions to requirements rather than railroading their pet ideas through? Better than the other IT staff who understand the extraordinary intolerance the public has for acute and sudden failure in public agencies? If this clueless cowboy had brought the 911 dispatch system down, heads would have rolled. Clemens can waddle off and get a new private sector job, but what about everyone else caught up in the mess? Just based on the post, I don't expect its author to even know enough to ask any of the questions you have. Why are you assuming the worst? Is there anything specific that makes you think Clemans was irresponsible? The hissy-fit he threw when he didn't get his way? Why, based on this article, would you ever give Clemens the benefit of the doubt? Especially when he's pitted against a public servant who has most likely risked his life on more than one occasion in the line of duty?