<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Off with their heads!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://newschoolsecurity.com/2010/02/off-with-their-heads/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2010/02/off-with-their-heads/</link>
	<description>The Blog Inspired By The Book</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 02:09:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chandler</title>
		<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2010/02/off-with-their-heads/#comment-948</link>
		<dc:creator>Chandler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newschoolsecurity.com/?p=1316#comment-948</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve never seen a &quot;must-fire&quot; policy, and I&#039;ve developed and vetted security policies and standards with the Law Department more than once.  Corporate Counsel very deliberately ensure that policy enforcement only specifies the right and not the obligation to act.

Unfortunately, the harsh reality is that from what I&#039;ve observed, the chosen severity of enforcement generally varies inversely with the seniority of the offender, so I assume that this structure is by-design, and not just to mitigate risk of unlawful termination litigation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never seen a &#8220;must-fire&#8221; policy, and I&#8217;ve developed and vetted security policies and standards with the Law Department more than once.  Corporate Counsel very deliberately ensure that policy enforcement only specifies the right and not the obligation to act.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the harsh reality is that from what I&#8217;ve observed, the chosen severity of enforcement generally varies inversely with the seniority of the offender, so I assume that this structure is by-design, and not just to mitigate risk of unlawful termination litigation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2010/02/off-with-their-heads/#comment-946</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:23:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newschoolsecurity.com/?p=1316#comment-946</guid>
		<description>Commercial, military, gov&#039;t, the only thing that I&#039;ve seen result in removal is porn. Even then, in some cases, put up a good enough argument (or even a bad one) and they&#039;ll let people slide. You pretty much have to commit murder in front of the office otherwise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Commercial, military, gov&#8217;t, the only thing that I&#8217;ve seen result in removal is porn. Even then, in some cases, put up a good enough argument (or even a bad one) and they&#8217;ll let people slide. You pretty much have to commit murder in front of the office otherwise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dunsany</title>
		<link>http://newschoolsecurity.com/2010/02/off-with-their-heads/#comment-945</link>
		<dc:creator>dunsany</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newschoolsecurity.com/?p=1316#comment-945</guid>
		<description>Well, I see it similarly to &quot;stealing this car may lead to consequences up to and including prison.&quot;  I have personally worked as a SO in places I&#039;ve had someone fired for violating acceptable usage policy.  It has to be left to the discretion of management, but often management is capricious. And if the policy violation made management look bad in a public way?  Well, it&#039;s off with their heads in the town square with all the peasants forced to watch.  And THAT is better than any policy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I see it similarly to &#8220;stealing this car may lead to consequences up to and including prison.&#8221;  I have personally worked as a SO in places I&#8217;ve had someone fired for violating acceptable usage policy.  It has to be left to the discretion of management, but often management is capricious. And if the policy violation made management look bad in a public way?  Well, it&#8217;s off with their heads in the town square with all the peasants forced to watch.  And THAT is better than any policy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

