I dunno about OP, but I am, and I have definitely prioritized tickets based on how interesting they sound.
User setup for a new hire that is already here and waiting? Meh.
Weird network problem with no apparent solution which will likely require days of investigation? Sounds good.
Worked the first six years of my career using no version history tracking or backups at all on one of our main systems. Nobody knew we didn't have backups and I didn't know how to use git and figured it wasn't so important since I was maintaining it alone anyway.
Lawful neutral cuz in 6mo when some “controller” punches three buttons to run a report and asks “Hey why’d you do that?” THEN I’ll have documentation. And a job.
Make ticket, receive assistance. Fight me on that and I’ll add you to my email inbox’s ruleset - I am now an LLM, and will gentle-tone you to death via faux misunderstandings
But none of these are real, in the real world IT won't touch your issue unless you create a ticket, then when you do they just never do anything about it anyway
I encountered "lawful evil" once. My answer of "I know what the problem is. I know how to fix it. But because you have no clue about what this company actually does to make money, you took away my ability to do it. So now I'm here, wasting both our time" didn't seem to go over very well.
Ehh. Depending on the industry and issue, thats wholley justified, not only from a "least privilege" sense, but from a regulatory one.
Step over into cybersecurity and you end up spending all day clamping down on usability because the company has legal requirements to meet to continue to exist. Many of the things we are compelled to do are overeager and overly pedantic, but it's either "do it, pay up, or shut down." The execs tend to prefer "do it" in my experience, which makes everyone's day a bit more tiresome.
So its entirely possible that was out of their hands.
Not to mention, how frequently the “I can fix it on my own” guy ends up making things worse.
Like my coworker who insisted he knew how to install a monitor and then couldn’t figure out why the display port wouldn’t work with a usb-a adapter. It had a normal DisplayPort plug and didn’t have a thunderbolt adapter (it’s a desktop.)
Rather than update the ticket that got him the monitor, he created a new ticket.
I can’t complain too much. IT guy likes me so he took the extra monitor and gave me a third one.
In this case, none of that applies. I do industrial programming. 99% of the ethernet networks I have to connect to don't have a router, and nothing is running DHCP. They locked out my ability to manually change my IP address.
Lawful good is asking for trouble. Before they know it, they'll be inundated with e-mails to their personal company address with poorly worded help requests. They'll spend half their time making and updating tickets on the user's behalf that would have been mostly automatic if they'd gone the Lawful Neutral route. They need to insist requests are sent to the main support address. I'm assuming that's tied directly to the ticketing system.
When I was being Lawful slightly-better-than-neutral, I'd create the ticket and then put a paragraph in the reply telling them to please not e-mail me directly in future, because one day I might be unavailable and their e-mail could go unseen for hours or even days.
Repeat offenders would eventually do it at a time when things were busy too, so I'd be concentrating on the tickets and not things to my personal address, so that slight delay often helped it sink in.
Funny, for me repeat offenders somehow always had a second request I couldn't find until 430pm on a Friday. Strange how it always happened. Oh well, sucks to suck.
I find that when a user continually makes a stink to get their ticket dealt with first, I gently try to correct them, and when that inevitably doesn't sink in, and they call during a critical issue, I tell them quite firmly that things are down and nobody at x site can work, so your printer will have to wait. Log a ticket and I'll address it when I'm done Brenda.
.... They usually back off when you make it clear to them that they're not the most important thing you're dealing with at any given moment.
Can we call this out on terminal text editors too? Some just color lines based on their content, and frequently comments end up being blue on black and it's impossible to read.
This comment describes the options for the next parameter in this config file, but I have no idea what it says, so I guess I'm fucked?
Apparently I'm Neutral Evil. But I consider myself to be Chaotic Neutral.
I'll fix the problem only when it's actually a computer problem and when you can explain what the problem properly. I don't care if it's a ticket or an email. Though I might not get to the email today and tomorrow I might forget about it, so you might want to put a ticket in that'll stay the until it's closed. But the ticket system sucks, so I might not log into it and see your ticket for a few days. If you send an email, I might do it right away, but you might have to remind me about it in a few days because I might've forgotten about it.
I don't care about your job title. If you VP of whatever the fuck and think you're important or if you were hired yesterday to an entry level position, you're all users to me. But the issues aren't fixed based on the order they come in, it's based on how much effort you put into describing the problem. If you think you're too important to describe the issue properly, you're low priority. If you want a meeting to describe the issue verbally, oh you better believe you're low priority, I'm not your fucking secretary that's going to take down your dictation. You got a keyboard in front of you, use it. I might eventually get around to asking you for more details about the problem, but only after I've fixed all of the problems reported by people that made an effort. Your priority is based on your effort.
Ok so maybe I'm Lawful Evil? But everyone thinks I'm Chaotic Evil because they don't understand why some people get stuff done right away while they have to wait.
