[2112] in Enterprise Print Delivery Team
Re: Accout Information Page
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Huxley, Bil)
Wed Dec 19 07:33:31 2001
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20011219062403.00b0ddd0@po9.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:34:58 -0500
To: David F Lambert <LAMBERT@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>,
Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Team <printdel@MIT.EDU>,
"Emmons, Gillian C" <gemmons@MIT.EDU>,
"Regan, Theresa M" <tregan@MIT.EDU>, "Roach, Roger A" <rar@MIT.EDU>
From: "Huxley, Bil" <huxley@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Tech Support within MIT CAO <CAOTECH@MIT.EDU>,
Bob Ferrara <rferrara@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <200112190446.XAA10888@fort-point-station.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Good Morning Dave,
Thanks for your reply. This is helpful to all of us I'm sure :)
Please note that you are on my to-do list to call this morning in response
to the voice-mail you left me yesterday afternoon. Also please note that I
have not been in W91, or anywhere on west campus, so far this week.
I hope I'm not misreading but I believe I perceive a lot of frustration in
your writing. Please understand that it was not my intent to frustrate
PrintDel but rather to clarify PrintDel's intentions in requesting
accounting information with the phrase "for monthly accounting and
reporting purposes". I think you can see where we were coming from if you
consider this in the context it was presented to us :)
All of this could not have been resolved in one minute, but even if it had
that would have been one person. Consistency, scale, reference and
sustainability would not be addressed by a brief phone call. We all know
that at some time it is appropriate and necessary to document policies and
procedures. What is truly in question is when, not if :) If you have a
strong personal preference for talking in real time and then documenting I
can try to accommodate you, but please give me a little slack on the timing :)
Also please consider that I replied to a PrintDel request in the same media
which PrintDel used to originate the request. I believe this is generally
considered good practice. Though had I anticipated the kind of reaction
you had perhaps taking it off line to be followed up by documentation in
e-mail so that everyone has the same info would have been better. Sorry I
did not anticipate your reaction, I'll try to consider it in the future :)
I agree it takes only a moment to fill in the requested account & addr info
once you know it needs to be filled and how to go about doing it. But
unless you plan to implement an automated way to inform a prospective user
that their request cannot be processed until go to this web page and
provide values, describing this as 'only a minute' is misleading.
I spoke specifically of EP1, not all Data Center printing. Moving EP1
means output is less accessible. Perhaps at some point this will be more
than compensated for by utilizing the other print capabilities you site, I
don't know and I would not assume on behalf of the business folks.
Since you mention that I've been using the IS's printers for more than a
decade (in fact more than two if I can count the old Building 11 and E19
MITVMB facilities), what Cost Object is used for those print jobs? This is
something I'm not familiar with. VMSECURE tells me that my charges go to
"ACCOUNT C62214" and "ACIGROUP C62214" which must map to Cost Objects
somewhere downstream. It wouldn't be 1633500 would it? If I fill in
1633500 on the IPM info, will the costs for jobs be charged to different
places if the request originates from my desktop rather than MITVMC? If
the simplest response is just to tell me that folks in CAO should use
1633500 then that would be fine :)
Thanks again and I offer my apologies if my questions and comments were
phrased in such a way as to trigger responses which I had no intention of
triggering.
Happy Holidays,
Bil
