Re: OT was Re: hey all, just a quick question on area defense fire control.....

 
In a message dated 12/15/04 9:30:44 AM Pacific Standard Time,  
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com writes:

Glenn  wrote:

><Chuckle>
>
>Sounds like interagency  dealings at work...

No, a former monopoly holder who hasn't quite  realized that they have
not 
just one but several different competitors  nowadays <sigh>

LOL Actually that DOES that sounds like at least one if  not two "three 
letter agencies" in my line of work who are discovering --  well, let's
call it a 
limit on agency 'license to act without regard to highest  management
goals and 
guidelines.'  Hee, hee, James Bond they  ain't.
 
And that doesn't count the pounding D.O.S. is taking for  irresponsible 
actions/words over the last many years.  Accountability, what  a
concept.  
Cartographers have had to defend themselves this whole time  (and
fortunately it 
almost always not our fault but came from unrealistic  expectations on 
users/administration.)	Map the World (that could have been  done) at
least 5 different 
scales (that maybe...) and keep it current within 5  years at large
scale (Must 
have been a good drug day when that was  stated).  Everybody always
wants more 
then can be presented on a chart  clearly of course.  The Worst is
Planning 
Graphics for the Pentagon.   The volcano in the Philippines that blew
years ago 
was the worst thing to happen  because then they wanted all the volcanos
to 
be reflected on the graphics.	There's a reason the Pacific is called
the Rim 
of Fire.  That got deflected  to a "user can overlay" option -- saying
No 
without actually saying  No.
 
Of course that 'other agency' being inadequately funding through  too
many 
administrations has a factor in the first case.  The latter was  just
pure 
institutional arrogance IMO.  But I wander far afield for this	list and
too too 
close to TMP's CA list (an area I adamantly refuse to  explore).
 
Gracias,

Glenn  "warbeads"