Rou

Florida has an idea. They're going to make a new license plate. And on this plate, they'll put a stain glass window, a cross, and the words "I believe"

Fair enough. I mean, I suspect it will face legal challenges, but I can understand it. I mean, we've got specialty plates for all sorts of groups, why exclude religious ones? Whatever.

Except...

Damn if the sponsor of the bill doesn't piss me, just as I'm tuning it out.

Rep. Edward Bullard says he wouldn't approve plates for other beliefs. See, now that right there pisses me off. Seriously. You expect this to survive a legal challenge while denying other faiths their ability for equal access?

Fuck off dillweed.

Of all acronyms on the internet, I think this one pisses me off the most: Too Long; Didn't Read.

It's generally followed by a plea for the author to give a shorter version. Drives me up a wall. If you can't be arsed to read the damn thing, why the fuck should I give two shits that you didn't read it. And the gall to demand that I condense my thoughts down into a cliff notes version for the ADD impaired? Fuck off. I picked my words carefully to best express myself. You have two choices: Read it, or ignore it. There isn't an option C where I explain things to you like a 3rd grader.

I'd keep going but there is a chance you wouldn't be able to stay focused long enough to read my closing remark:

Fuck off.

God I love Illinois sometimes. Monique Davis, IL state legislator decided to take an interesting position during a committee hearing last week. You see, she told someone that their religious beliefs were dangerous. In fact, the belief was so bad, that it would be dangerous for children to even be aware of them. These beliefs destroyed everything the state was build on, and hindered the progression of the state. She continued with a long tirade about how this was the land of Lincoln, and people here believe in God. Then, she told him to get out of his seat and get out of the hearing.

Man. They must be BAD. Damn.

What was he saying? Oh, he was saying that he was an atheist, and believed that the topic of the hearing, a bill to give public funds to rebuild a church that burnt down, was unconstitutional, and violated the separation of church and state.

Now, I'm amazed really. Couple of points.

One, How fucking dare this bitch get up there and say that. How does this ignorant piece of shit honest stand up there and act as representative? Right there, as an agent of the government, she's doing her best to supress his first amendment rights. Not just once, but TWICE. He has the right to whatever fucking religious beliefs he wants. He also has the right to seek a redress of his grievances. I know, that damn pesky first amendment can be a real bitch.

Second, Can you imagine, even for a nanosecond, her saying the same thing to a Jew? Or Muslim? I'm willing to bet the answer is no. Because bigoted assholes like her don't have the nerve to say shit like that to them. She knows she would be removed from office the next day. But atheists? Nah. No one gives a fuck. Didn't even really make the news anywhere.

Third, how the fuck is an atheist view dangerous to children? I'm sorry, how do you get that? It's no more dangerous for your Christian child to be exposed to atheism than it is for my atheist child to be exposed to Muslim or Christian ideas. No, your claims that ideas are dangerous. That your way must be the only way. That no other viewpoints can be tolerated or discussed. Sound a lot more like Pol Pot, Stalin, and Muslim extremists. Honestly, look around at the company you keep.

Finally, you tried to throw him out? Fuck you bitch. You have no right to be a representative of anyone. Fucking die in a fire. Slow roast style.

When I grew up there was two type of peanut butter: Creamy and chunky. You can still get creamy. You can also get all sorts of natural, and organic types. What you can't get (or at least, I can't) is chunky peanut butter. They have extra chunky, super chunky, and Supercalifragilistic-chunky. But not just plain chunky.

Honestly, how do we know something is SUPER chunky if there is no chunky to compare it to? How do we know the claims of mega-chunky-ness are valid if there is no frame of reference. I mean, sure, compared to creamy, all chunky peanut butter fares well on a chunk-o-meter. But that doesn't mean squat to me as a consumer.

I'm not sure really when it went away. In all honesty, I know that "regular" chunky was just replaced with the super mega names to make people think there was more chunks in there. What gets me is that they got rid of the baseline ideal in favor of the marketing stratagem. And worse, people bought into it.

Hey guys. I know you might not have noticed. I mean, the four of you obviously bumped into each other in the hall and started chatting about work. A legitimate everyday occurrence.

However, for 10 minutes all 4 of you have been standing there chatting about this client or that client, not one of you noticed that all four of you are clustered around the women's bathroom. One of you is leaning on the doorjam.

Maybe it doesn't matter to you. But it looks kinda odd. If I was a woman, I might be somewhat uncomfortable with 4 tech nuts with poor hygiene hanging around the bathroom. Bit skeevy, ya know?

Phyllis Schlafly doesn't like the first amendment. More precisely, she doesn't respect it. She wants to redefine it so that she can silence those things she doesn't understand or agree with. It's a common position, sadly enough. So many people think that free speech means they get to say what they want, and no body else should be granted those same rights.

Her target: video games.

Extremely violent video games have become the dangerous obsession of a significant portion of our youth, and several towns and states have passed ordinances intended to prevent minors from buying or viewing them. But judicial supremacists are striking down these laws by claiming this extremely graphic violence deserves the same First Amendment protection as Shakespeare

My eye is immediately drawn to certain things. First, Shakespeare was very graphic if you actually read what he said. Second, yes, they are both protected by the First. And third, 'supremacist' is a strange word choice. I'm not sure if it means what she thinks it means.

She continues and attempts to redefine speech to fit her needs:

Legitimate free speech expresses violence in a rational context, rather than displaying it graphically to evoke an immediate emotional reaction. It is not a First Amendment right to cause panic on an airplane by shouting that someone has a bomb; nor is it legitimate free speech to evoke violent reactions in children through graphic video game

Yes, shouting "Bomb" Or "Fire" isn't free speech. However, she fails to demonstrate how video games equate to this. Without that, it's nothing more than a straw man. Set it up and knock it down as many times as you like, the two are not obviously linked, so it doesn't work. There has NEVER been a single properly formated study that demonstrated a causal link between video games and violent behavior. Never. Not once. Correlation, some. But that's not the same thing.

Further, I find "displaying it graphically to evoke an immediate emotional reaction" to be a highly disturbing concept if it were ever applied legally. Saving Private Ryan, the Matrix, and Saw would all be legislated under it. Hell, damn near every movie strives to evoke emotion. Games do the same thing for the same reason, unless you're discussing Tetris or Bejeweled.

Seriously, when was the last action movie that expressed the violent content in a rational manner? Why would we hold movies up to a different standard? Sometimes I wonder if dumb shits like Phyllis Schlafly realize that a 5 year old is legally allowed to purchase a R rated movie. There are corporate policies against it, not legislative ones. Why should games be different?

So, Phyllis Schlafly, please, next time you want to discuss things rationally, I suggest you sit down and think really hard about what the freedom of speech really means. Speech doesn't just mean Hello Kitty and Danielle Steele and Shakespeare. It's not just Pride and Prejudice, the GodFather, and Citizen Kane. Not just the statue of David and the Mona Lisa. Not just flag waving and PTA petitions. It's also racism, anger, hate, sex, and violence. Grand Theft Auto 3, flag burning, and Debbie Does Dallas. The KKK, the Nation of Islam, and Westboro Baptist Church. You can not have one side of the coin without the other.

I'm sorry if you don't want your precious little snowflake to be exposed to it. As a parent, that is your prerogative and responsibility. You have ample methods at your disposal to restrict their access. If you choose not to avail yourself, that is entirely your fault. Before you strike out and act as if the world is full of 'supremacists' who don't agree with you, I suggest you take a deep breath and realize that you're not always right, and even if you were, the world is better because people are allowed to disagree with you.

Free speech is what it is. You're not allowed to redefine it just to fit your narrow minded agenda.

Mary Wolski was PA's very first female firefighter. Mary Wolski was fired. Mary considers this a grave injustice and a violation of her rights.

This leads me to ask, why did she get fired? Silly thing. They say she poses a threat to herself and others. Why do they think that? Oh, it might be because she burned her fathers house down in a suicide attempt. Two things: One, I'd fire any firefighter who turns into an arsonist. Two, I'm not really comfortable with a suicidal firefighter being sent in to rescue me, or to support the rest of the crew.

Maybe it's just me. Maybe there are some facts out there that don't show up on google. But there ain't no way I let her back to work. Suicide is a big issue for any employer. It's even more so when the employee is responsbile for the lives of citizens, her co-workers, and herself.

Combine that with the fact she attempted to kill herself using arson as her tool? Nah, fuck you. You're fired. I don't care if you male, female, or hermaphrodite. You're fired. Shut the fuck up.

Hillary has been pushing for the primary elections in Florida and Michigan to count. She says it's important that their voice is heard, and that those people get to have their say matter.

That's an interesting position for her. It opens her up to a number of not so obvious points. If any of the pundits took their heads out of their ass long enough to realize it, it would be a clear death kneel for her candidacy.

First, she's focusing on making sure they count because it's the democratic thing to do. We don't want to disenfranchise them. However, the rest of her campaign is focused on making sure the rest of the countries votes do NOT count. Obama has the popular vote, the delegate count, and the state count. The majority of the country has spoken, and they didn't choose Hillary.

Second, she didn't get on this high horse until after Super Tuesday. If she had made these points early on, that would be ok. But she didn't. She decided that she needed a LOT of help to even make it close, and this would go her way. She's clearly making the point that she's willing to support anything if it gets her elected.

Third, she doesn't want a re-vote. She's begrudgingly willing to consider it, but she really wants the current vote to stand. She's been fighting for that because she wins big that way. She's let it leak out that she may be open to other options, but the vote standing is her clear preference. Again, understandable because it helps her win, but it's two faced because it's equally obvious that she wouldn't do the same if the vote was against her.

It all adds up to the same thing. She's lost, and unwilling to admit it. She's willing to stoop to any level to change the results of the primaries. Even if I supported her, I would draw the line here. I don't want a candidate that is willing to use those tactics.

John Adams lives and breathes. Maybe it's just a man using a pseudonym, but I think Adams would smile to think that his name would be attached to this work.

In Whitewater, Wisconsin, a man pens a blog under the name John Adams. His main goal seem to be to point out the failures of the local government in general. Basically, his site is just like this one, but more focused and localized.

Naturally, the authorities in his area don't like to be criticized. The chief of police, James Coan, decided he didn't like the site. He and others on his staff, spent time at work, using police and country resources to try to identify the man behind the pseudonym. They ran license plates, and they conducted surveillance, all in an attempt to violate his rights. They even went so far as to get a judge to issue a subpoena demanding his identity.

As you might recall from my recent post, anonymous posting online is a protected right, guaranteed by the constitution, and upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. Any attempt by a government body to identify a person posting online without probably cause of a crime is a violation of that person's first amendment rights. Pure and simple.

So, our friendly neighborhood incompetent cop has already made my shit list. I have this silly thing about cops... you know... obeying the law. And police chiefs even more so. So The next part makes me love him all the more.

He thought he figured out who John Adams was. So, Mr Legally Challenged police chief dropped by for a "talk". He brought a police lieutenant with him. Nice, friendly cat right? I mean, there is nothing intimidating about two armed cops knocking on your door and demanding a discussion about your posts online. I believe the Supreme Court describes that as a "chilling" effect on free speech. It's made worse by the fact that they were wrong. They were "questioning" the wrong guy. He was not "John Adams".

But they did eventually find the right guy. Had the same setup. Chief and a cop come to the door and demand to talk about the website. Some intimidation occurs, and the conversation ends. The Chief claims that he didn't try to stop Adams from publishing. He just wanted Adams to "provide him with answers to his questions and concerns." Never mind he could have just emailed the website to get those answers.

The only reason I can see for face to face over email is intimidation.

Quite frankly, Coan seems to be the kind of cop that give cops a bad name. He's abusing his power in an attempt to silence a critic. I'm extremely glad he doesn't have any power where I live. For those poor readers that do suffer under his tyranny, I can only say I feel bad for you.

Mr Coan, I sincerely hope you're fired. The sooner the better. And I hope Mr Adams and his community get someone more qualified, and professional to run their police department.

There is a Kentucky legislator, Tim Couch, who has a very bad idea. Because he's a legislator, he gets to make his bad ideas into bad bills.

He feels that there is a serious problem out there. Online bullying.

And he's got a solution. Of course he does. He wants to ban anonymous posting. Every post online would require it to have a real name, real address and real email associated with it. The real name would be displayed with the post. The web site owner would be liable for ensuring that his site was in compliance ($500 first offense, $1000 each additional).

Beyond the idiotic enforcement problems, this is still an moronicly stupid law. Right now, u235 would owe $500 for themself, and $1000 for each of the other contributors to this blog. Then, on top of that, another $1000 for each visitor reply.

Very quickly, you're well over 10 grand in fines from this site alone because some numbnut lawmaker doesn't like online bullying. This level of stupidity is on the order of Ted Steven's comments about tubes. Frankly, people that far out of touch with the reality of the internet shouldn't ever be in a position to make bills that regulate it. Even if those bills have a snowball's chance in hell of passing properly.

Beyond that, we really don't want MORE information about people being easy to trace online. To be honest, the government should be making more of an effort to educate people about how to protect their privacy online. Identity fraud is a big enough problem without making it easier for the thieves.

The Oklahoma House of Reps passed a bill. The State senate has not yet passed it. I hope they never do. The gist of this bill is that if a student expresses an answer that is correct in line with his or her religious beliefs, the answer should be considered correct, even if it is not in line with modern scientific theory.

The idea is that a student can bring discussion of religious ideas up in science class and not be penalized for it. They say it's protect a students freedom of religion and expression. Iffy, but understandable.I disagree, but that's me. However, this bill is so poorly written that it goes further.

A school district shall treat a student’s voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats a student’s voluntary expression of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

That is worded in such a way that test and homework answers can fall under this bill. That means if a student anwsers "How old is the Earth?" with 6000 years old, the teacher is required to accept the answer as correct.

This bill is EXACTLY what I bitch about so much about not allowing religious ideas to be discussed in science class. Science is about details and correctness. We KNOW the earth is over 4 billion years old. If a student claims it's 6000 years, that answer can and must be considered WRONG. Sorry, them's the breaks.

Moreover, it invalids ANY answer as wrong. You can belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and use pasta-farian answers. As long as you "believe" the answer is correct as a result of a religious belief, it must be accepted. Seriously, have you ever met a teenager who couldn't spit out some bullshit belief that supports his wrong answer? Me either.

School is about correct and incorrect. It's about instilling ideas and methodologies to assist the growth of children into adults. This bill throws all of that away in the pursuit of religious ideology. It's everything that's wrong with allowing religion and public education to mix rolled into one bill.

“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.” - Philip K. Dick

If you're not an NFL fan, you may not know or care. But Brett Farve recently announced his retirement. After 15 years with the Packers, and 17 in the NFL, he finally decided to hang it up. He holds most of the major records for quarterbacks, a Super Bowl ring, and an almost certain place in the NFL Hall of Fame. He's considered one of the best quarterbacks to play the game.

So, he held a press conference. Talked to the media, delivered a prepared speech with thank-you's and good-byes. During which, he broke down a little and cried some.

As a man and a fan, I don't have a problem with that. I don't understand why anyone would.

But, considering this is the internet, obviously people have been blasting Farve ever since as a "cry-baby" and a "wuss". That his reputation is tarnished by it. I was a bit more surprised that ESPN Radio led the chorus during their coverage of the story. I mean, those are supposed to be legitimate reporters.

Let's be honest here. Brett Favre lasted 17 years at a pro level in one of the most physically punishing sports in the world. He got hit by very large and strong men. He led his team to victory time and time again. He stood tall and respectful throughout his entire career. And you dipshits think that showing emotion and sadness at leaving that behind somehow makes him less of a man? That somehow his farewell detracts from 17 years of performance?

Honestly, some people need take a minute and put things into perspective. If I was leaving my job after 15 years, I'd be near to tears too. And I can't even imagine how much more intense that feeling would be if you had millions of fans, teammates, coaches and friends who supported you for years and years. And now it's all coming to an end.

Put yourself in his position. If you could hold back the tears, you're a far colder man than me. And frankly, Brett Farve is a better and tougher man than those that are taking pot shots at him now that he's leaving.

They must die. They must die a lot. In evil nasty and very medieval ways.

They called me a 4:35 AM. When I receive calls before the buttfuck of dawn, it had better be fucking good. I accept work related calls for my on-call duties. Fine. I accept family emergencies, but they had better be good. That's about it for the 4am call list.

Automated calls asking me to refinance my mortgage? What the mother-scrumping fuck. You've seriously got to shitting me. That is wholly unacceptable. In fact, that is so far outside the realm of acceptable calls at 4am, I'm not sure where to start.

The caller ID? 867-5309. Somehow, I don't think Jenny was calling me. If it was her, I hope the bitch dies and takes Tommy Tutone with her.

I don't know what rat-dicked cum-stain thought that calling people at 4am was a good idea, but I would really like some time alone with them in a room. Just me, a baseball bat, and enough time to demonstrate how I feel about his marketing concept.

Holy tap dancing Buddha. I don't know what he ate. I don't know what the fuck is wrong with his internal organs.

What I do know is that the mens room has become a testing facility for biological weaponry. Seriously, send UN inspectors. It's like there is a green haze in there. If I had a canary, it would have died.

I can hold it, thanks.

Gotta love these meetings. I mean, they're just a great concept. The staff is abused and exploited most of the year. We're understaffed, underfunded, overworked and short of resources. But we have a quarterly meeting that makes it all better.

A recognition meeting. I mean, sure, we all know what we look like, of course, but this is a chance for management to get a glimpse of us before returning to the ivory towers. Naturally, such a meeting can not interfere with normal operations, so it's held after normal work hours. We're naturally required to attend.

We're not a huge division of the company. Call it 40 staff and 10 managers. Yes, you read the proportion correctly. So, after bringing our division up out the red, reducing operational errors by 95%, expanding our services, and opening up new revenue streams, you'd think they'd be happy with us.

They are. Kinda. Mostly, they seem to have called the meeting to jerk off in front of us. The entire proceeding was one manager giving certificates to each other, followed by a reading of the significant accomplishments that they're taking credit for. Hell, one of them was so touched by the award, she broke down and cried tears of joy. Of the 40 witnesses... er... staff, 2 got awards. But all 10 managers did. It's really quite incredible.

Have I ever mentioned how much I hate corporate culture?

Just a theory? JUST?

Let's say for a minute that we grant creationists that evolution is a theory that could potentially be subject to change. It's true, even if the likelihood of a major change is beyond the odds of winning the lottery. But just for a second, assume that a fact is discovered tomorrow that throws the theory into a tailspin.

It's happened before. Newton's theory was replaced with Einstein's. But that didn't mean that gravity changed. The facts never change. Our explanation for them does. Likewise, evolution occurs. We've seen it. Genetics and fossil records have so much supporting evidence that it's nearly impossible to comprehend. Nothing you do or say will change that because it's a fact. We may change our explanation. Maybe it's not natural selection driving the changes. Maybe it's something else. But that doesn't alter the observation that evolution occurs. Plants evolve. Animals evolve. People evolve. Every living thing today evolved from something that came before.

Of course, the idea that evolutionary theory could need to be re-written is a huge presupposition. Even granting them that huge concession, we see that their attempts to discredit evolution are flawed at the very core. I honestly believe that it comes from a tragic misunderstanding of the terminology of science. Theory, in everyday use means conjecture; some unproven idea. In scientific usage, a theory is well tested model that explains observations and offers up predictions for future behavior. It's not JUST a theory.

Until people learn the difference between the two usages, I don't think this debate will ever go away. The battleground for this is the classroom. Proponents of intelligent design and creationism (I repeat myself) are pushing to teach the idea of "just a theory" in classrooms. Sadly, they are fighting for science classes to fail the children the same way it failed the parents decades before.

St. Mary's Academy near Topeka, Kansas had a boys' basketball game. It's a private religious school that competes within the Kansas State High School Activities Association.

Michelle Campbell was scheduled to referee the game. But just before the game was supposed to start, the Academy insisted that she not be allowed to do so. The reason given?

Campbell, as a woman, could not be put in a position of authority over boys because of the academy's beliefs.

Good going fuck nuggets. Seriously. There is, however, a bright side. When she was removed, the other ref refused to work the game and left with her. Another ref was asked to fill in and also refused when he heard the reason for her removal. The game was eventually played though.

Stupid school. And people wonder how sexism and racism are propagated.

Mass Effect.

It's a big hit. People love it. It got very good reviews across the board.

It's a fairly well done RPG universe, with a number of unique species and wide ranges of planets to work with. Interface is good. Story telling is pretty well done with some realistic scripting and well conceived plot points. The scripting surrounding the romantic relationships is actually the worst in the entire game, but what do you expect from sci-fi video game writers? Seriously. Even considering that, it's probably the best RPG I've played in a while.

The game's rated M for mature for "Blood, Language, Partial Nudity, Sexual Themes, Violence". Now, guess which part is causing people to get their panties in a bunch? Yeah, we all know blood and violence is ok. Language isn't a problem either. It's all about the sex.

There are people who are really upset that in the course of role playing, you can build a relationship with NPCs and actually get a sex scene. OH NOES! SEX! RUN AWAY! Look, it's not that bad. You can have sex with one of the 2 female NPCs. You'll get a cut screen (same scene with different skin tone depending on which girl you're in bed with) that shows a semi-erotic scene with a little bit of one of the chicks ass. Honestly, while it probably wouldn't make it onto network TV without a few seconds cut out, it's actually pretty tame for movies. In fact, watch it yourself.

Youtube link here

See, not that bad really. Like I said, not TV, but fine for movies. You knwo the difference between the two, right? One is regulated broadcast, and the other is pu5rchased by the consumer willingly.

Anyway, that was it. Ready for what the other side has to say?

It's called "Mass Effect" and it allows its players - universally male no doubt - to engage in the most realistic sex acts ever conceived. One can custom design the shape, form, bodies, race, hair style, breast size of the images they wish to "engage" and then watch in crystal clear, LCD, 54 inch screen, HD clarity as the video game "persons" hump in every form, format, multiple, gender-oriented possibility they can think of.

...

If a pre-teen, teen, young adult, or adult male plays such a game in which the women DO submit without choice, are made to appear as Barbie streetwalkers, and perform whatever act can be imagined, what's to stop that same male from assuming that the women in his "other world" shouldn't be forced to do the same.

....

As technology continues to push the limits of imagination and interaction more and more the brain, the emotions, the feelings will integrate with physical responses in reality. And while the makers of such trash seem to be pushing our next generation of young men through the gates of hell as fast as is humanly possible, it needn't be that way.

Here's hoping that as the next President will be forced to deal with this continual emerging reality - and enemy that has set its site to our destruction from within - that we will have elected a man of such character that he will have precision in the clarity of his response.

Painful, eh? It hurt my brain, that's for sure. This guy really see this game as a gateway to hell. You can't argue with people like that. They're incapable of reason or logic. So, I'm not going to bother cutting his arguments down, or mentioning again the fact that the game's rated M. Not much point in saying if his child is playing this game it's his failure as a parent. Instead, I'm just going to file him into the crazification factor

Gotta love it. Rudy came out and made a big push to court conservatives with a English as a national language idea. It's a decent policy for Rudy. Helps endear him with those deeply patriotic, America-Fuck-yeah!, jingoistic types. Falls right in line with his constant repetition of the words 'nine-eleven'.

Of course, like any politician, he's a two-faced sack of horse shit. How do I know? Because his ads in Florida are in Spanish. You can't win down there without the Cuban vote. And you can't do that without ads in Spanish.

Somehow, I bet that before he says "Soy Rudy Giuliani y apruebo este mensaje", he doesn't mention that he wants them to all be forced to learn English.

I don't care if you think it's a good program or not. Doesn't fucking matter. If you can't stand up for your own programs, why the fuck would we consider you to be a good leader for our country? You're a pandering little limp-dick, piece of political hackery Rudy.

Die in a fire Rudy. And have a nice day.

So, we have this server. Actually we have lots and lots of them. But I don't care about them right now. I care about this one.

This one is a Linux box. And this Linux box has mirrored raid array.

So one day, one of our techs walks by the server rack and notices a little yellow light. Like a dedicated employee he reports it. Which is good because that little yellow light means something important. It means one of the drives has gone bad and has been removed from the array.

YAY for technology seeing a fault and isolating it!

So, we call up the support company and say "Hey you. Yellow light bad, RMA me a new drive so we can replace it."

You'd think they'd ship one out. But you'd be wrong. What they told us is that we needed to run a diagnostic program on the system to verify that the little yellow light was accurate. We rolled our eyes, but we tried to do as they said.

Of course, they sent us the instructions for a different model of server, so the first attempt to do this failed. But eventually we got it done and sent the logs off thinking that now they would give us a new drive

No. Of course not. I should have known. They told us that the next step for diagnosing the problem would be to rebuild the drive array from scratch and re-image the server.

....

No no, you read that right. In order to test to see if my raid drive is broke, I have to blow away the server. I ask you... what is the point of having raid if I have to blow away the server in order to test a raid failure? At that point, raid has ceased to be useful. I mean, I suppose it kept the server up until we could schedule an outage, but the failure still caused an outage.

So, we roll our eyes some more and schedule some downtime to rebuild the server.

First step, reboot and log into the BIOS to reset it to factory defaults. And that's where we get the problem. The server no longer understands the bad drive. The raid controller craps out and says that it has an unrecoverable drive error. Server won't boot. Remove the drive with the little yellow light and the server boots up fine.

So, we call up the support company. They're going to ship out a replacement drive.

It took us 10-15 man hours, 2 separate change approvals which involve dozens of groups signing off on our tests and a rather large conference call. This takes about 3 weeks to get everything set up. All to tell us exactly what the little yellow light told us in the first damn place.