3 ms·

> This means an unapproved batched and drawn-out phaseout would be a breach of contract. You could brownout or kill a few a few days before the real issue, tho

by mlyle 4y ago

> This means an unapproved batched and drawn-out phaseout would be a breach of contract. You could brownout or kill a few a few days before the real issue, though, potentially.

amluto 4y ago
Which might breach an SLA or itself be deliberate malfeasance. If I were in this position, I would want to be absolutely squeaky clean. What one could try is to call the CEO directly. Or maybe try the legal backdoor: contact the general counsel, tell them that the contract says such-and-such, that you think the contract is well written and you intend to do what it says, but that the organization should be aware that it may cause a problem. If legal doesn’t know how to get the CEO’s attention, then something is very wrong.
- masklinn 4y ago
  The very first post of TFA lays out that they've been sending emergency-level alerts for a while (aside from that being a year-long issue): > 4 meetings, 124 emails, and two phone calls a day for the last 14 days have warned them of this. There's only so much you can do. > If legal doesn’t know how to get the CEO’s attention, then something is very wrong. From the thread legal (and / or compliance) is the setter of the issue, and was well aware that it would cause issues (for a minority), but they were not in charge of resolution. And from downthread posts, they likely extensively documented their warnings: > oh I’m absolutely backing the horse with the 3 miles of email threads proving this And methinks legal and compliance had very much planned for the issue coming to a head, because they were getting fed up with being blow off, and having to shoulder the legal or regulatory risk.
  - ChickenNugger 4y ago
    I think this is exactly it. A year to make fixes and nothing was done? Legal is like, "We warned you every way we possibly could have." "two phone calls a day for 14 days" is far from insufficient notice, to say nothing of the rest.
    - spoils19 4y ago
      I disagree. In conservative companies, it would be common to meet in person and give a firm handshake, before taking out the required documents from a briefcase. It's sad to see this tradition evaporate.
      - somerandomqaguy 4y ago
        I'm not sorry to see it go. Half the time the people in the meeting forget what was decided on because it's one of a thousand other things they had a meeting about and no one we wrote anything down. There's value in face to face, but not when it's a wide reaching announcement like this.

by mlyle 4y ago

> This means an unapproved batched and drawn-out phaseout would be a breach of contract. You could brownout or kill a few a few days before the real issue, though, potentially.

amluto 4y ago

Which might breach an SLA or itself be deliberate malfeasance. If I were in this position, I would want to be absolutely squeaky clean. What one could try is to call the CEO directly. Or maybe try the legal backdoor: contact the general counsel, tell them that the contract says such-and-such, that you think the contract is well written and you intend to do what it says, but that the organization should be aware that it may cause a problem. If legal doesn’t know how to get the CEO’s attention, then something is very wrong.

masklinn 4y ago
The very first post of TFA lays out that they've been sending emergency-level alerts for a while (aside from that being a year-long issue): > 4 meetings, 124 emails, and two phone calls a day for the last 14 days have warned them of this. There's only so much you can do. > If legal doesn’t know how to get the CEO’s attention, then something is very wrong. From the thread legal (and / or compliance) is the setter of the issue, and was well aware that it would cause issues (for a minority), but they were not in charge of resolution. And from downthread posts, they likely extensively documented their warnings: > oh I’m absolutely backing the horse with the 3 miles of email threads proving this And methinks legal and compliance had very much planned for the issue coming to a head, because they were getting fed up with being blow off, and having to shoulder the legal or regulatory risk.
- ChickenNugger 4y ago
  I think this is exactly it. A year to make fixes and nothing was done? Legal is like, "We warned you every way we possibly could have." "two phone calls a day for 14 days" is far from insufficient notice, to say nothing of the rest.
  - spoils19 4y ago
    I disagree. In conservative companies, it would be common to meet in person and give a firm handshake, before taking out the required documents from a briefcase. It's sad to see this tradition evaporate.
    - somerandomqaguy 4y ago
      I'm not sorry to see it go. Half the time the people in the meeting forget what was decided on because it's one of a thousand other things they had a meeting about and no one we wrote anything down. There's value in face to face, but not when it's a wide reaching announcement like this.