Res bossitans: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{a|conf|}}Per Büchstein’s formulation in Discourse on Intercourse, the person on the conference call whose fundamental essence is to boss people around ( a..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a| | {{a|confcall|}}Per [[Otto Büchstein]]’s formulation in [[Discourse on Intercourse]], the person on the [[conference call]] whose fundamental essence is to tell the others what to do (in [[Büchstein]]’s phraseology a “action-assigning thing” or “[[res bossitans]]”). More generally, the person — often a contractor from Deloitte — whose sacred role in the organisation is to prod his colleagues in the ribs whenever they seem to be enjoying themselves. | ||
The classic exchange is this: | |||
''Scene: An [[all-hands conference call]]. Late in the day. Attendees, severally, quietly feel their life essences drain away.'' | ''Scene: An [[all-hands conference call]]. Late in the day. Attendees, severally, quietly feel their life essences drain away.'' | ||
Line 14: | Line 16: | ||
:'''All attendees''' ''(nodding, in unison)'': ''Passively'' monitor it. | :'''All attendees''' ''(nodding, in unison)'': ''Passively'' monitor it. | ||
:'''[[Res | :'''[[Res bossitans]]''' ''(clears throat)'': Who is going to take an action to passively monitor it? |
Revision as of 17:18, 2 April 2019
Conference Call Anatomy™
|
Per Otto Büchstein’s formulation in Discourse on Intercourse, the person on the conference call whose fundamental essence is to tell the others what to do (in Büchstein’s phraseology a “action-assigning thing” or “res bossitans”). More generally, the person — often a contractor from Deloitte — whose sacred role in the organisation is to prod his colleagues in the ribs whenever they seem to be enjoying themselves.
The classic exchange is this:
Scene: An all-hands conference call. Late in the day. Attendees, severally, quietly feel their life essences drain away.
- Attendee 1: OK, so that there seems to be consensus: it sounds like a bad idea.
- Attendee 2: Agreed. It’s hard to configure, there are potential regulatory consequences and it doesn’t really fit our business model.
- Attendee 3: Yeah, but there’s an industry group that has formed to look at it.
- Attendee 1: Stupid idea, though, right?
- Attendee 2: Yeah. But who knows — maybe they’ll figure out a way to make this work, but it’s not likely.
- Attendee 3: Ok why don't we just leave it.
- Attendee 1: Maybe just keep an eye on it — in case they do figure it out.
- Attendee 2:Yeah. Monitor it.
- Attendee 3:Passively.
- All attendees (nodding, in unison): Passively monitor it.
- Res bossitans (clears throat): Who is going to take an action to passively monitor it?