How about fining consulting companies when their staff post idiot questions

[former_member181923]

I was reading the ABAP General Forum the other day and happened to stumble on a series of posts which centered on the difference between operating on an itab using verb "X" versus operating on an itab using verb "Y". (I will not mention the two actual ABAP verbs, to avoid embarassing anyone.)

Now I can understand stupid questions being posted to ABAP General by staffmembers of SAP customers, because I know that companies often throw developers into ABAP without adequate training (following the famous rule: "If you know one programming language, you know them all.")

So I'm never bothered when a stupid question is posted to ABAP General by a staffmember of a direct SAP customer, because I don't know the circumstances.

BUT -

I get really ticked off when I see a stupid question posted by a staff-member of a consulting company.

I have this reaction because presumably the company is billing its client (an SAP direct customer) for trained ABAP personnel, not personnel who have to ask questions or be corrected about basic ABAP fundamentals.

It reminds me of the old Arthur Andersen claim (pre-Accenture, of course.) Andersen would tell clients - "We hire such smart people that we can send them to SAP coursework and they'll hit the ground running faster than your own SAP veterans." (No - don't accuse me of "naming names" here - the old Anderson folks actually did pitch this nonsense and everyone above the age of 40 knows they did.)

So what I suggest is that when some staff-member of a consulting company pitches a really stupid question to the Forums, deduct two points from the total of every member of that particular company who posts to the Forums.

That way, maybe some of these companies would do their own policing.

And - if you ask me who decides what's a stupid question - well, I think it's usually pretty obvious. In marginal cases, I'm sure Rich or Thomas could arbitrate easily.

[Nigel_James]

I'm with Craig on this on David. You have no idea of checking the context of the question. That is you don't know whether they are on a customer site or not. And to me the only question that is stupid is the one that is not asked.

Who is going to want to ask a question if they have any thought at any level someone is going to call me stupid because it is asked?

Who would want to visit a site like that?

"Ha Ha you stupid idiot you didn't know the standard itab sorting order for hashed tables when the planets align?"

I know I wouldn't come back.

Sure sometimes you need a thick skin in this place but a little love and understanding is what is needed rather than fining someone.

"Hey you don't know that? Here's how you do it, it's really easy ..."

I would want to join that community. I would want to take part in that community and I would want to contribute to that community.

But then that just my 2p worth.

Come to think of it does it matter if a question is asked 1000 times?

Something about "70 times 7" comes to mind. If you don't know the context of the quote never mind.

Kind regards,

Nigel

[former_member181923]

Yeah - I know all the usual arguments against what I suggested.

And you're right - there is no way of knowing whether an idiot is "on the bench" or not.

Although in the case I was referring to, if the idiot WAS on the bench, he or she should never be allowed off it.

So my point remains, minus some extraneous details of chronology.

Regards

djh

[suresh_datti]

David,

I think such policing would not only require additional resources but also defeat the very purpose of SDN.. if someone is learning at the Client's expense, the onus is on the client to curb it.. not SDN.. hey if you don't like a post just ignore it ....

~Suresh

[former_member181923]

I am not at all against consultants learning at the client's expense. I have had clients who've let me attend formal SAP coursework "billable" (not the course fees/TDY - just the hours) and have had clients who've let me do on-line learning when I've finished all they can throw at me.

What I am against is programming consultants who, arguably, do not have the cognitive wherewithal to program.

Yes - one could just ignore posts by such people, but the fact of the matter is - SAP itself and SAP's reputation suffers from the fact that such people are sent out to clients. For the simple reason that they write nonsense whose defects are attributed to SAP software.

I know I know - you will say - how can you possibly tell whether someone has to cognitive wherewithal to program?

My answer is: how can you tell when a child does or does not have the ability to understand word-problems in high-school algebra (2 trains, etc.)?

No difference.

[Former Member]

I would say we let this one <b>drop now</b>, this is not in the spirit of what SDN or BPX is and is not something we will implement - you can not punish someone for not knowing that's the reason they came here - to learn.

[Former Member]

First this is a horrible attitude. We strive on SDN/BPX to be more than accepting and easy going and here in the community we do not "attack" anyone for having what someone else considers to be a "stupid" questions nor do we distinguish is that person a customer/partner/employee/etc. Yes there is a "Top Company" report but in the end it's people.

Now as for this particular gripe of yours - have you considered the fact that many of these companies are now using SDN as a training ground? They send brand new hires into SDN to learn and learn they must and then they test them on that knowledge.

No one should be punished for asking a question.

[former_member181923]

prior to their staff-members being billed to clients?

If not, I think it's a practice as horrible as the horrible "attitude" you cite.

But hey - that's what makes the SDN world go around. Right ?

[Former Member]

Nope nor can anyone guarantee they are not we go on a bit of trust and I've sat in on many sessions where SDN is used to ensure the people are learning what they are supposed before they are even allowed near a customer.

But again to the point we are not going to punish someone for asking a question.