LawTalkers - It was the wrong thread

Does anyone here use IM for work purposes? I'm troubled with the outright ban of it. I lost a similar battle a few years ago, so I might be still bitter about it.

In my opinion, might as well ban e-mail too.

We (big pharma co.) are actually encouraged to use IM.

Gattigap

01-22-2009 03:29 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 378642)

On occasion. It's helpful in phone-based negotiations if you're not sitting in the same room as your client, for example.

Penske_Account

01-22-2009 04:28 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gattigap (Post 378645)

On occasion. It's helpful in phone-based negotiations if you're not sitting in the same room as your client, for example.

2. This is how I broke the ban. It helped that a large client asked me to have it for the above state purpose.

Adder

01-22-2009 04:37 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 378642)

We have official use of the IM program associated with Lotus Notes (Sametime) within the firm. I don't use it as much as I used to, but I have used it for work purposes quite a bit, in particular for quick questions and consultations that do not rise to the level of a phone call and side communications for people who are on the same call.

No comment on unofficial use of other im programs.

dtb	01-22-2009 05:28 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 378642)

IM was banned from the investment bank where I worked for all but traders -- and their IM conversations were monitored so closely that it would give Big Brother a hard-on.

If a trader said something via IM that was a no-no, compliance knew about it minutes later.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

01-22-2009 05:30 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtb (Post 378679)

Translation: I knew who every trader fucked the night before, and if I were male it would have given me a hard-on.

Penske_Account

01-22-2009 05:47 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtb (Post 378679)

Eh, I just extrapolate the rules I use in the Gentleman's clubs.....its no sex in the champagne room .....says who?.....baby i break all rules!!! Then I pop champagne!

dtb	01-22-2009 05:57 PM

Re: It was the wrong thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 378680)

Translation: I knew who every trader fucked the night before, and if I were male it would have given me a hard-on.

Well, I wasn't in compliance, but I heard stories!!

dtb	01-22-2009 05:58 PM

Changing the Subject

Now that people are "over here" and this seems like a subject broad enough for the big board, how do people feel about restoring the search function?

Sure, you can see the oeuvre of posters easily -- but so? Perhaps others have greater sensitivity to this issue, but I would be for restoring it.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

01-22-2009 06:02 PM

Re: Changing the Subject

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtb (Post 378689)

I'm moderately in support of that, because the "threat" of outing to an employer is basically gone, given what we discuss here (and if they wanted to find out it would be easier to do so using IT).

Perhaps it can be date limited, say 180 days?

Replaced_Texan

01-22-2009 06:03 PM

Re: Changing the Subject

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtb (Post 378689)

As someone who earlier today wanted to mock Dianne for her outrage over the promo images of Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder in light of today's Oscar nominations but didn't want to wade through a year or so of posts to do so, I'm all for restoring the search function.

notcasesensitive

01-22-2009 06:40 PM

Re: Changing the Subject

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtb (Post 378689)

Count me as in favor of the return of the search function.

Flinty_McFlint

01-22-2009 06:42 PM

Re: Changing the Subject

Quote:

Originally Posted by notcasesensitive (Post 378702)

Count me as in favor of the return of the search function.