Ciaran’s Omnipurpose Blog

It’s such a loose term, when you think about it.

What does it mean, exactly?

Can atheists be spiritual, even without believing in the supernatural?

Can you appreciate beauty without always thinking you can explain it, even though the culturally-dominant religious explanation might be beautiful, even if it’s absurd?

This video is by the excellent A Hughman.

It occurred to me today that I probably don’t do enough of this, so it was good to find this video on Youtube to get me thinking about how I think:

Merry Christmas!

I'm a big fan of lists. Heck – show me a project manager who isn't a fan of lists! I'm especially fond of lists that explain how not to do something. This way, I feel as though I'm learning from the expensively-gained experience of others.

The list isn't meant to be exhaustive and isn't meant to be in order, but I hope this list proves useful to someone, somewhere:

Mistake #1:Keep the team and the stakeholders apart - I've worked in some (large) organisations where the lead developers are on good drinking terms with the Directors. I've worked in other organisations where there has been a wall of separation between the people who have the business vision and those who actually need to build the tools to deliver that vision. In one memorable case, the only contact the team was permitted to have with stakeholders was a set of documents written by business analysts from another part of the business. Of course there always has to be a balance struck between proper use of time and the importance of the project, but communication, especially at the outset of a project, is vital.

Mistake #2: Communicate infrequently – If the project is important, people will be interested and should be asking as much as being told how the project is progressing. Frequent, early communication allows for project plans and budgets to become exposed to real life challenges and be up for discussion. Early communication allows stakeholders to see what they're getting and reject or change it early. Frequent communication builds up an important level of trust: that the stakeholders care what the team is doing and that the team is doing its level best to deliver what the stakeholders need. This trust is a useful currency for when the challenges come later in the project.

Mistake #3: Save all your testing until the last minute – If you're running an agile project, you're likely to be testing every 2-4 weeks, depending on the length of your sprint. "Fail Early" is the philosophy here. If you're doing things in a traditional waterfall manner, you're probably hoping that there'll be only a handful of defects revealed during your testing phase. Consider instead breaking your project into a series of mini-waterfalls that will allow your testers to get on the case as early into the development process as possible.

Mistake #4: Don't tell a client when they're wrong – The client has brought you in for a reason, so you shouldn't be afraid of making suggestions on how to best set up the project for success. Of course, there are diplomatic ways of doing this, and it helps to know when to exercise discretion.

Mistake #5: Put the client on the critical path without telling them – Working in collaboration with a client means that very often, you're dependent on them for things like servers, meeting attendance, approval etc. Make very clear up front just what you need from the client and when you'll need it by. If you're nervous, keep it on the risk log for regular review with the client (you're doing that, aren't you?)

Mistake #6: Focus on contracts not collaboration – Something unexpected always happens in a project. If things go very wrong, there's always a temptation to throw blame around and cover your back. It's just the human thing to do. It's also the wrong thing to do. Both you and the client have a lot invested in a project; financially, emotionally and in terms of career. It's in both your interests to find a way out of a problem together: fix the problem not the blame: focus on working together, rather than scoring contractual points and you'll be much closer to a positive result for all.

Mistake #7: Mix your methodologies – Are you running this project in Agile or in Waterfall? Does everybody share the same expectations about how the project will proceed and what their responsibilities are? A common mistake for newcomers to Agile is to fix your time, scope and cost on a project, which is fine if you have contingency, but Agile doesn't work like that. Similarly, people who have dipped a toe in the Agile water and have decided it's not for them often take the bits they like, such as the great flexibility in accommodating changes to requirements, and try to apply this to Waterfall – this is dangerous because waterfall projects, by their non-iterative nature, don't allow for iterative changes without some significant upheaval or nimble footwork.

Mistake #8: Just get on with it and never look back – Make sure you kick your project off well. At no other time in a project do you get such a golden chance to motivate your team by sharing the vision with them, agreeing ways of working, setting expectations and understanding risks. Simillarly, take time throughout the project (and again at the end) to look back and see how you're all working, what to keep doing and what to do differently. Agile calls these moments retrospectives, but you can call them whatever you like.

Mistake #9: Extract every waking hour from your team – Overtime is quite often a fact of life, especially at the end of a marathon project. Overtime is demonstrated to give your team a performance boost in the short term, but carry this on indefinitely and you get burn out, a dip in quality and a loss of momentum. Swapping out burnt-out people is costly. Not to mention, it's not very nice to put people in this position in the first place.

Mistake #10: Never, ever change your plan – Again, this is where project management is as much art as science. Be risk averse: We project managers love risk and issue logs. Change is as often as not a good thing. If a plan changes throughout the project, it's a sign that it's being used, understood and reflects reality. If the plan isn't changing, perhaps nobody's actually following it.

Well, I had quite a few more than these 10, but I think I'll keep my powder dry for another post. Of course, I'd be very grateful for your comments and suggestions for the next 10.

I had an overdose on Tuesday.

Nobody found me at home with a trickle of blood coming from my dead nostrils. I wasn't passed out in the lounge with a belt around my arm and a needle hanging from my shriveled vein.

That's because I overdosed on coffee.

It isn't the first time, you know. I've overdosed on caffeine before. I remember vividly drinking several strong cups of coffee before going to the gym late one night and being unable to sleep for the whole night. I lay in bed until about 4am, before realising that I was desperate for the bathroom. And here began my dilemma: if I get out of bed, I'll have a heart attack, if I stay in bed I'll humiliate myself. I finally reached a compromise of falling out of bed and dragging myself to the bathroom. I thought my heart was about to explode!

Still, it gave me a preview of an average night in the life of the infirm.

So I felt more empathy than sympathy for this Teenager who overdosed on 7 double espressos, a girl who was a bit tired at work in a coffee shop and ended up in hospital with a caffeine overdose. And she and I are not isolated cases – two friends of mine have completely messed up their body clocks through excess habitual caffeine consumption.

But no Ciaran blog post is complete without some whinge or another. My whinge today is about the abysmal spelling that seems to insinuate itself into everyday life, especially in shop signs. A fine example is the one I spotted with my colleague Chris in a cafe today. What the bloody hell is an Expresso anyway? And why do so many people say expresso instead of espresso?

I've always been interested in cults and the devastating harm they can do to individuals and the people around them.

The video does outline some of the actual techniques that cults use on prospects and members, and even if it seems a little light-hearted at first, it makes some serious points. These cults are a serious problem, there are lots of cults in existence today and plenty of atrocities throughout time, including:

• Order of the Solar Temple (Famous Swiss murder-suicides in which 48 people died in 1994)
• Peoples Temple (909 deaths, including 270 children in 1978)
• Aum Shinryko (gassed the Tokyo tube system in 1995)
• Heaven's Gate (Suicide Cult – The "Heaven's Gate Away Team" left Earth in 1997)
• Lord's Resistance Army (has been waging a civil war against the Ugandan government since 1987 using child soldiers)
• The Manson Family (of Charles Manson fame – responsible for a string of brutal murders)

Years ago, I read a book that outlined the mechanisms that these cults often use to effectively brainwash recruits into their ideology or religion. If you think you're clever enough to avoid their fate, think again! I knew a good few people at University who got hooked into cults. To read more about cults and be aware of the dangers, take a look here.

In publishing this post, I'm going to do a few things:

1. Add to the mountain of "news" around the Islam issue in this country.
2. Air some half-baked ideas I've got.
3. Open myself up for possible abuse and threats.
4. Hopefully learn from my readers through their comments on my thoughts.

  I don't really understand where the government is going with its efforts to engage the "Islamic Community". I don't even think there is an "Islamic Community"; maybe there are "Islamic communities". It seems the government is talking to people who are mainstream, who are not involved in the terrorist atrocities and near-misses we've seen in this country. What's the point in that? Didn't we make the same mistake by not talking to Gerry Adams in the first place, instead putting it off for decades? And on the other hand, I see some logic in what they're doing. Maybe they're trying to dry up the water around the terrorist fish. Maybe if the mainstream community could be persuaded to seek out and reject the terrorists in their midst, we'd have less of a problem. As it stands, though, I don't see (perhaps the media isn't telling me) Muslim leaders condemning their fellows for effigy-burning, bombing and incitement to violence. I do see the government funding projects that separate people, including separate faith schools, which I think is a terribly backward step. What got my back this time was reading about the heckling John Reid got. I'm all for politicians getting heckled, but here's what was said to him by Abu Izzadeen:

"How dare you come to a Muslim area when over 1,000 Muslims have been arrested?"

John Reid was later interrupted during a question and answer session by Anjem Choudary to tell the home secretary that Muslims did not need British values:

"We believe Islam is superior, we believe Islam will be implemented one day. It is very rich for you to come here and say we need to monitor our children when your government is murdering people in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Later on, one of the above explained is actions saying that he would not dicsuss these matters with a non-muslim. So it seems that these opinions assert:

1. That there are areas in Britain where only Muslims should be allowed to go.
2. That the number of muslims arrested has any bearing on the issue of whether people should blow themselves up and take others with them.
3. That Islam is superior and that a move to overturn the liberal democracy we have in the UK is to be applauded.
4. That British foreign policy absolves Muslim parents of any responsibility for their childrens' upbringing.
5. That if you're not a Muslim, your opinion is worthless to a Muslim.

We're told that this is a minority view, Of course. We're told that these chaps don't represent mainstream Muslim opinion. So:

1. Why isn't more being done or being seen to be done by the mainstream Muslims who want to live by our laws and by our cultural norms?
2. Why does the media give people like Abu Izzadeen the spotlight and not the two women he told to "be quiet"after they tried to encourage dialogue?
3. I know there are people out there who want to make this country an Islamic theocracy, but is all the attention they're getting all some sort of media conspiracy?

I don't really see what the problem was with John Reid's speech on its own, other than it stated the bleeding obvious. What he seems to have been asking for was that parents should raise their children to be tolerant and to resist those who would call on them to become terrorists. The simple reaction should have been, "Yes. That's how we bring up our children." The other point that he was making was that if you see a crime being committed or if you see someone premeditating a crime, you have an obligation to report this to the police. The simple reaction should have been, "Yes. That's morally right and it is the law of this country. We agree." The summary of the responses from the crowd in front of John Reid should have been: "And your point is?"

This is a very old clip but relevant this week, given the struggles our civilisation is facing. This sort of thing happens every single day on TV and radio. Wouldn’t we all be a lot better off if politicians actually answered our questions? Aren’t they our public servants?

So today is September 11th. Five years ago today, thousands of people lost their lives in the largest terrorist atrocity in history. Almost three thousand human beings died at the hand of a backward theological fascism.

I remember how my workplace dropped what it was doing and how everyone was transfixed by what was happening on the TV screens. I remember every single major news website shutting down due to overload. I remember sitting with Rebecca in her flat in Queens Park whilst we watched the news all night.

I remember how much we cried.

I remember thinking how sick and twisted and evil the people who had done this were and that nobody deserved this.

I’ve been brought up to have a lot of gratitude for what the USA has done for the world. The energy, inventiveness and resourcefulness of the USA is incredible. We must never forget how much we owe them after we were bailed out in WW1 and WW2 and the Cold War. I still look to the USA as a place I’d love to live in someday and I think that the spread of democracy throughout the world should be encouraged. I think the United States is in general a positive force in the world.

I’m also not above being selfish. I’m aware that many of the benefits I enjoy by living in the Western World are due, in part, to the environment that exists and is supported by the USA. I’m talking about our world trade system. I’m talking about the uneven distribution of wealth in the world. This is a result of the corporate interests that drive America. I’m not proud of it, but I’m glad to be here and living a life of relative plenty and security.

But please don’t think I consider the USA to be purely altruistic. The USA has put itself in a position (as befits the dominant world power) whereby it feels obligated to protect and support its interests around the world. As the world economy has become more integrated, but certainly traceable from the days of the Monroe Doctrine, the USA has proven to be more active in areas that one might consider aren’t in its “Back Yard”. The USA is also inconsistent in spreading its values across the globe if it suits.

To many, the USA has been meddlesome. To some, it is the embodiment of evil.

So I struggle with the dilemma of looking up the the USA and being grateful to it on the one hand with a revulsion for the exploitation and meddling I am associated with by existing in the system that the USA dominates.

I would love to see a world where resources are shared more fairly, even though I struggle with the thought of having to give up my luxurious lifestyle.

I do remember thinking at the time that the USA had an unprecedented opportunity to say, “OK. People have given up their lives in a very spectacular and desperate way to hurt us. Let’s reflect on what we can do to make the world a better place through non-coercive means. Let’s use the unity this atrocity has brough to make a Marshall Plan for the world and work together to elminate the causes of this evil.”

Unfortunately, that vision did not bear fruit. Perhaps it was unworkable or utopian. I almost wish we had tried.

What I do know, from the Cost of War site, is that the war in Iraq has cost over $313,848,570,000 to date. That’s right – Three Hundred and Thirteen BILLION DOLLARS!. With that money, we could have provided for the health 0f almost 190,000,000 children or built 2,500,000 houses.

All that, for a war that had nothing to do with 9/11.

I also see that in the USA and across the world our freedoms are being eroded by anti-terror legislation. We’re starting to do the job for the terrorists by cutting our own throats.

My thoughts today are with those who tragically lost people that day and for those who have lost people in the War on Terror and related conflicts.

And whilst I love the ideals of America I cling to the hope that they will awaken once more, with an America under the leadership of Statesmen, not politicians. People who think of the long-term interests of their country and the world, not the narrow interests of their patron corporations in timescales of election cycles.

As one of the the Founding Fathers, Thomas Paine, once said, “My country is the World. My Religion is to do good.”

I eagerly await the return of that spirit. The world needs it right now.

Who the Hell is Sean John?

Try saying “Sean John” five times fast. Go on!

Makes you sound like an lisping, fat-tongued idiot, doesn’t it?

Now try saying “Puff Daddy” five times fast.

This is getting boring, right?

Now try saying “P Diddy” just once!

Yep – once is enough, isn’t it?

What the hell is it with Sean Combs? He starts off his (by all accounts commerically successful) music career calling himself “Puff Daddy”, which I have to admit I could never accept. The Daddy of all Puffs was either The Honey Monster or Larry Grayson/ Kenneth Williams. No one else comes close.

So that proves that “Puff Daddy” is a fraudulent and misleading name for Sean Combs.

Publicly declaring his intention to re-invent himself, although most likely realising this error, he then took the name “P Diddy”. This name is clearly ridiculous. End of story.

Or is it? He then appears on the Today Show in 2005 to announce his newest contribution to our global culture: dropping the “P” from “P Diddy”. His reasoning: “the P was getting between me and my fans.”

Our hero decided to become a fashion designer in 1998, marketing clothes under his first two names, Sean John.

So what’s with this constant self-reinvention? Most people are quite content to be known by the same name(s) throughout their lifetime. These are some of the possible explanations I can think of:

• Cheap publicity
• Insecurity
• A desire to put the gun-toting past behind him
• Sheer Posing
• A deep-seated conviction that “Puff Daddy” was the wrong choice and fundamentally misrepresents the deep and complex characteristics of his soul.

This whole renaming thing is so lame. Why do I go on about it? Well, it reminds me of when they renamed Marathon to Snickers, or Opal Fruits to Starburst or Midland Bank to HSBC. Nothing really changed, just a name. So much in public life nowadays is about what things seem, rather than what they are.

Oh – and take that stupid toothpick out of your mouth. It just looks stupid. The last people I saw doing that who thought it made them look cool and tough were the kids on my schoolbus when I was twelve.

You’re not a ganster, Puffy/Diddy/whatever you’re called today. You make “music” and perfume.

Every summer Rebecca and I go with my Mum and Dad to visit my family in Wiesbaden in Germany. We usually go on the second weekend in August.

Last summer, on the second weekend in August, the Gate Gourmet dispute resulted in BA cancelling our flight to Wiesbaden. My dad had taken time off work and we’d booked a trip with the family on the Rhine and we had to cancel due to BA’s inability to manage its contracts. The horror was compounded by the fact that the weather was bad and we decided to go to the cinema in my parents’ home town to watch Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, which was absolutely dire and really rubbed our noses in the fact that we weren’t with our family, we weren’t on the on the Rhine or visiting the Weinfest or drinking good beer and eating great food. We were watching Johnny Depp impersonate Michael Jackson instead!

The thing that might stop us from reching Wiesbaden this year is the thwarting of an alleged bomb plot involving several aeroplanes flying between the UK and USA. The result of this has been the closure (for a time – then reopening to massive disruptions) of most of the UK’s major airports.

Guess what? It’s the second weekend of August!

Not everyone seems to be aware of the situation. Sure, the BBC knows, my Google newsfeeder knows, my friends know, the newspapers know, the British Airports Authority knows (and has taken its site down). MI5 (the British security service) also know about it:

The only people not to know, it seems, are Easyjet, who had nothing on their site mentioning the plot and disruption. They even allowed me to start booking a flight out of Gatwick, departing today. Oh, they did warn me, but not about what I thought they might warn me:

It goes without saying that I’m glad they found out, that we’re going to be safe, that something ‘orrible was prevented. The thing is, though, I’m terrified of getting stranded in the UK again and missing out on Wiesbaden and getting stuck in the cinema watching a rubbish movie. Any suggestions for the rubbish movie to watch in the even of getting stuck in the UK again, would be most welcome.

And don’t get me started on this whole Islamofascist business (though we don’t know who the plotters were at this time, or even if there was a plot as described). I’m keeping my powder dry for that lot in another blog, I think. And don’t worry – I’ve got some nasty things to say about Neocons too.