My day started with this post on the Techwr-l list:
|
Subject: Politically correct term for four-eyes authorization?
Hi,
We have a
problem with a term in our product documentation (and the UI as well), and I'd
like to ask for your collective wisdom.
In line with the
four-eyes principle, our product can require an authorizer to approve (and
possibly review) the actions of a user. Currently, this is dubbed four-eyes
authorization. The problem is that the "4-eyes" term is derogatory
and should be changed. Possible candidates we found and are commonly used are
"dual control" and "two-person rule", but these are not as
accurate, because in every definition I could find (for example, http://www.theserverside.com/report/Integration-of-User-Control-Mechanisms-into-Secure-Critical-Applications), they refer to
two users who have the same privileges to perform an action, but can only do so
together. In our setup, this is not the case, one of the users is who performs
the action, and the other approves that.
If any of you
works in an IT security or finance-related field, have you encountered a
problem with four-eyes before? (And how did you solve it?)
Thanks a lot for
your ideas in advance.
|
Off-list, I responded with this:
|
I don't accept your conclusion that "4-eyes" is
derogatory. I've been called "4-eyes" on occasion when someone refers
to me wearing glasses. If anything, I don't think it's accurate as I wear
glasses so, by the definition that "4-eyes" means someone with
glasses, I wouldn't think I needed a second person. Is there a reason you have
to call it "anything" at all and simply focus on naming the task the
user is doing with your product. Something like "Obtain Authorization from
a Second User."
We have something in the system I work on now where a
person reviews a response to an essay and then assigns a score, based upon
established criteria and project rules. The response to the essay is then
routed to another user and that person reviews the same response and then
assigns a score. If the scores are the same, all is good. If the scores are
different, they go to another person who reviews the response and assigns a
score. That third person who assigns a score is "adjudicating" the
assigned score. The name of that task is, yep, " Add an Additional Score
for Adjudication of Score Differences."
Good luck.
[rant: I'm saying all of this because I went through
something similar years ago while working at a telecommunications billing software
company. I was talking to the lead designer about a project that would add two types
of the same entity to the system. One was going to be the highest level and was
to be called "master" and the term for its subordinates? Yep, "slaves".
The lead designer said, "We can't have 'master' and 'slave' in our
system!" I said, "Why?" "Because it could offend
someone!" "Does our system have anything to do with the Civil
War?" "No. " "So why would you apply terms that are most
commonly associated with the Civil War to our system?" My point was that "master"
and "slave" in our system had nothing to do with the despicable
legacy that caused the Civil War. It is a term that is used in the IT industry
and our use of it, in the IT industry, was appropriate. Lately, it's getting
worse. Society is just getting too crazy with what you can say and what you
can't say. For example, if you work at a specific company and say, "you
guys", you now have to put $1 in a jar because "you guys" is
sexist. Another example is if you describe someone that robs someone else as a
'thug' it's now considered a racist term. One time I mentioned that "the
office girls" were making copies for me of a user manual only to be called
out for that phrase because it was "sexist." Finally, and this is
more about the dumbing down of our society, if you attend college at Utah
Valley, there's now a third lane in some areas on the sidewalk. One is labeled
"walk" one is "run" the third is "text", which is
for those walkers that are texting as they walk. Someday we will have no way to
communicate because all words and even actions will be deemed inappropriate
because they will offend "someone" in some way. It has to end
somehow. [/rant]
Sorry if this rant offends you but I thought it might
best describe my perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment