Conference 7.286::digital

         IMHO, sad, distressing....and likely very,universally true. Too
    damn bad that what we're becoming is just another company,more image
    than substance.
    
                                                 Peace
                                             and good luck,
    
                                                 -RAM-

    
    	Yep, sad but true.  That has kinda been my experience in 7+ yrs
    here (even when $$$ was being made). But, I would fully expect it to be
    the same in any company over X number of people, where X is not all
    that big. All you can hope for is that the paychecks don't bounce.

    .0 outlines what's been happening for years. i ranted and raved about
    it for years to. i no longer have the energy. 

    Re: .0  ...I saw three Livewire announcements about newly
    appointed VPs...
    
    The sad thing is - Upper management has no idea just how much
    NEGATIVE impact these announcements have on morale.  If they 
    did, they'd probably hire these folks with little or no fanfare.
    I don't know of anyone who has read any of these announcements 
    over the past 6-12 months and said "Wow! Great!! Just what we 
    need to help speed us on our road to recovery!!"  It's virtually
    impossible to read these announcements and not think about a
    close friend or two who has left recently through downsizing...

    re .0 Sorry but if I were you AND I had an alternative means of
    employment,I would take it.As Mr Haag points out,you can't get there
    from here.The only real hope is that you work in a strong team which is
    capable of functioning and having fun regardless of the crap from on
    high.
    Don't let the turkeys get you down

    ....how about changing the Alpha AXP logo AGAIN!!!!!..........
    
    .....put that one on the list....
    
    
    -Dom

    re: .4
    
    But on the other hand, if they did hire those people without
    announcing it, then people would complain we were not being informed
    with what is happening in the company. 
    
    It's a no win situation.  
    
    Allan

    Unfortunately, the .0 scenario is playing itself out across the
    country.  I had a feeling of deja vu reading the note, because it
    sounds very like my own situation.
    
    On the VP situation:  I could understand Palmer and company wanting
    to bring new blood into the organization.  But I can't understand
    the methods being used, because he doesn't seem to be *replacing*
    managers, just adding new ones.  What's the sense of that?
    
    Geoff

    I don't think he is just adding them. Remember names like Glorioso,
    Gaviglia and host of others? Many of them left without much of a
    fanfare. Plus hiring new talent in a company not doing so hot might
    mean BP has to promise these guys atleast a good title and so it might
    seem that number of VPs have gone up from earlier count.
    
    I don't have problem with that. The problem I see is that the number 
    of middle managers hasn't gone down in proportion to laidoff ICs. Whatever
    happened to the desired ratio of 1 manager to 15-20 ICs?

    while all these new VP's are setting up shop, and empires... the middle
    management (all five layers) are pretty much the same... 
    
    it's always reassuring to me when I think that those same managers that
    led us into this mess are leading us out.
    
    tony

re: .10

>    while all these new VP's are setting up shop, and empires... the middle
>    management (all five layers) are pretty much the same... 
    
I think Palmer's team is whittling its way through middle management from the
top down.  But by its nature this is a very slow process.  By the time you get
to "middle" management, replacing from the outside is probably a less likely
proposition...so you dump one manager and probably replace with another at (or
near) the same level, i.e., a peer of the "dumpee".  Then, to give the new
manager a fair shake you probably want to give them at least 6-12 months on
the job.  Given that so many of Palmer's top team are new, it's a crapshoot
in terms of how well they're able to assimilate the history and merits of the
peer group that they're selecting new middle managers from.

I think a novel approach would be for managers in Palmer's upper echelon to
go directly to the lowest level, the ICs, and get the views of some randomly
selected and representative (but not overly large) group of these to help them
understand what the real problems are and who in management has shown a talent
for solving them in the past.  That could add a little "bottom up" sanity
checking to the "top down" approach, as well as being a form of MBWA.  After
all, it is the ICs that ultimately do most of the work, as much as managers
in Digital like to neglect their people management duties and aspire to
"SuperIC" roles for themselves (to impress their superiors, one supposes).

								- paul

         Ref. 2670.9-
         ....ditto,ditto ditto,DITTO !!!!!

    re:.4, .11 etc.
    I'd say .11 is closer to the mark.  These new VPs are NOT the same
    Greater Maynard Good Ol' Boys Marching Band and Chowda Society.  I've
    met some of them and the change is obvious.  It's also true that
    they're actively reorganizing, and that means they have to learn who
    the deadwood middle managers are and which ones are worth saving.  And
    in some cases, they are dealing with ICs and others.  Not always, but
    there are some positive efforts in some areas.
    
    Every new VP is one job not held by a chowdahead.

Note 2670.8 by AUSTIN::UNLAND 
    
    >Unfortunately, the .0 scenario is playing itself out across the
    >country.  I had a feeling of deja vu reading the note, because it
    >sounds very like my own situation.
   
    amen brother. amen. but what do we do about it? sit around and wait for
    the inevitable "tap"? griping about it in notesfiles used to get
    attention. not anymore. unless we attack some individual, product, or
    organization. and that will brand us as "non-team players", people with
    "a bad attitude", or outright radicals to be eliminated.
    
    frankly, i believe that those at the very top in this company want the
    company and themselves to succeed. i also believe that everyone between
    me (bottom of the org chart in minneapolis) and those at the top are
    only interested in self preservation. preservation at any cost. the
    situation is bleak but, perhaps, not yet hopeless. 
    
    the key is to diplomatically, unemotionally, factually, and in a timely
    manner get what's REALLY happening in front of those that really care
    about the success of this company instead of themselves. that may not
    be possible anymore without an admission that one would be terminated
    in the attempt. but honestly, there are worse fates. 

    
    re .14 --
    
    
    Not sure I appreciate the statement that "everyone" between you & the
    top is focussed purely on personal issues.
    
    I'm not. I fit fair & square in the middle manager box so reviled in
    here. I run an international team, & work hard to understand their
    needs, & the needs of our customers. I want us to make money. I want
    us all to survive -- by our combined efforts -- territory, industry,
    sales, marketing, engineering, support & the whole gang.
    
    I read Notes heavily, 'cos it gives me feedback on issues that matter
    to me. Sometimes it's my only source of information, sometimes it's a
    useful cross-check to other info sources.
    
    Often I get good clues from Notes on areas to test within my own group
    -- is the unhappiness in here felt by my team? Sometimes yes, & I'll do
    all I can to remedy the problem, or to alert those folk higher than me
    that a problem exists & I cannot solve it.
    
    Some of the problems we have impact ability to make revenue & profit.
    Some have not yet been raised in Notes. No point in raising them in
    Notes if all is does is to de-motivate -- I'll flag them with those
    people accountable for fixing the issue.
    
    I'm a relatively new Deccie (5yrs), & used to running international
    operations in other companies. We've got some real problems to beat,
    but just shooting off about new senior appointees in a generalised 
    sense will not help beat those problems. More communications on what
    they bring to DEC might help you, more explanation on why others have 
    had to go might help -- but it's important that your frustrations are
    heard, recognised, & overcome.
    
    Above all, those that are left need to do whatever they can to protect 
    their pensions by making sure the customer never has reason to complain.
    
    We're a long way from that, & that's my goal for our team. We will not
    succeed unless those around us cry long & loud about any issue that
    detracts from customer satisfaction. 
    
    If we know about it, we'll add our efforts to try & fix it. That's what 
    our team is paid for. I know that many more middle managers care with 
    passion about the company, its customers, & our staff than was suggested 
    in the previous note.
    
    Raise issues, demand solutions,  -- but above all, don't leave it to
    everyone else to fix. Apathy kills companies, & one real benefit from
    Notes is that the people who care about the company do contribute loud
    & long. May they always do so, without fear or prejudice -- & with 
    accurate data to help the fix.
    
    Oh, & let's always fix the customer issues first ....
    
    
    Colin

    RE: .15
    
    Impressive note, Colin. Nice one.
    
    Laurie.

re:0

	Why should Digital convince you to stay?
I think that in these financially challenged times the
corporation should be taking the viewpoint of:
Convince us why you should stay!


-Trev

re .-1

If I remember correctly, the "Love it or leave it" attitude hasn't been
well recieved here.

    re: -2
    
    Whoa...hold on there!
    
    Remember that many of the people who are deciding to leave the company
    are those who are extremely talented and _EMPLOYABLE ELSEWHERE_! If you
    had no possibility of offering value outside Digital, and have been
    clinging to a do-nothing/say-nothing/take-no-risk position, would you
    be so anxious to bail? Ever heard of Brain Drain? I can tell you of
    consultants I've known who did bail, for a number of reasons, and
    without going into detail of the positive effect it has had on many of
    their lives, Digital suffered greatly by losing these resources.
    
    We have to make it attractive for the 'good people' to stay. That
    obviously becomes more challenging if they fear that the reasons that
    some people targetted for downsizing are just unlucky because a
    political justification rather than a well-thought business
    justification was presented for doing so.
    
    Let's pay good people what they are worth, let's free the true
    creativity and entreprenurial spirit, and remove the risk of suggesting
    a 'new way' of doing things. Reward boldness! Penalize cowardice!
    
    Eat your vegetables, sit up straight...whoops, sorry, once cliches
    start rolling off the keyboard, it's difficult to stop them.

    re: -.3
    There is a very short distance between "love it or  leave it"  and
    "where'd everybody go?"
    
    tom

    RE:19.
    
    I just had to react.....
    
    (Hear Hear[the sound of a hand clap] bis bis)
    
    ;) Jan.

Hi,

	Re: .18 & .19 'Love it or Leave it' not 
	well recieved.

What about 'Love it or Change it' ? I was not advocating
that we don't convince some people to stay(with the right
inducments) so long as they are the right people i.e in 
the 'Brain Drain' game.  The not so talented people 
should be encouraged to leave. Hence my reverse question
'convince us to let you stay'. The question wasn't being
aimed at people already making steps to get out, but 
rather at those left holding the can...If the 'dead wood'
was cut out, there could be room for more talented
individuals or better rewards for those doing the real
work.

-Trev  

    re: <<< Note 2670.22 by WAYOUT::TALBOT "Trevor Talbot" >>>
    
> What about 'Love it or Change it' ? I was not advocating
> that we don't convince some people to stay(with the right
    
    There are many, many people in this company who are signed up to
    "Love It *and* Change It", but there are tremendous hurdles:
    
    Turning around a company this size takes time. Some of us have
    been in constant transition for over two years. New bosses every
    quarter, new organizations, conflicting metrics, utter turmoil.
    Top management has changed, middle management is slower to react,
    and we at the bottom hold the hope that eventually our situations
    will change for the better, er ... eventually.  Digital is asking
    many of us to make investments and assume considerable risk.
    
    But the reality is that the people who are being asked to hold out
    the longest are the ones who can't afford the luxury of "wait and
    see". We don't have the financial resources or golden parachutes 
    that make layoffs tolerable, we can't afford to see our take-home
    earnings decline while our cost of living increases. And we can't
    afford to pass up other career opportunities that effect the well-
    being of our outside lives and families.
    
    I salute the manager who wrote earlier in this notesfile, and many
    others like him who have kept this company running amidst chaos.
    But will it be enough?  Will they get things going right before
    our reserves of employee tolerance and customer goodwill run out?
    I don't have the answer, and I don't think anyone does at this point.
    
    Geoff

    re: .17
    I take exception to 
    
    "Convince us why you should stay!"
    
    The base note indicated that the author got her/his experience with a PC
    recently via EPP, is conversant with the internet to the point of
    collecting and installing the components of the popular unix clone and
    learned enough unix to deliver "digital added value" to a customer's
    unix shop.
    
    I'd say DEC would be desperate to keep individuals with this kind of
    spirit.  Unfortunately Digital appears to be quite a bit more short
    sighted.
    
    I say, please stay and keep up the good work!
    
    Ignore the slings and arrows from outrageous bean counters.  Use the
    internet as it was intended.  If you learn from your efforts, it is
    official business.
    
    Stay to watch the management blood-bath.  It will happen/is happening.
    
    Stay to participate in the next computer revolution with a company that
    has real technical advantages that can benefit any IS organization.
    
    Stay because leaving this company to the (internal) ravens would be a 
    disservice to the profession.  Its important to keep as many caring
    people around to provide as much of a reality check upwards as DEC
    adjusts to the new styles of computing that are emerging.
    
    I'm not saying you shouldn't look or keep a resume, and certainly not
    that you should turn down an opportunity if something exciting comes
    up.  I certainly know that none of us can be certain that staying will
    necessarily be a matter of "choice".
    
    But I still believe that DEC will emerge as healthy place to work
    again.  Desperate times have made for some deperate measures.  Hard
    decisions were forced on people extremely ill-prepared and unqualified
    to make them.  Digital is not (by far) the only company that has been
    caught napping like this.
    
    I think it will be fun again as we get our feet on the ground in going
    after the more complicated distributed systems that will be required
    in the next decade.  It will get better as management gets distilled
    down into a hard-core group that understands that this is where we will
    benefit customers.  The "VMS forever" group will have their place along
    with "RSX forever!", but they will only a minor component of a
    broad-reaching business portfolio.
    
    We need you, our customers need you.  If you can find job satisfaction
    in addressing complex multi-vendor interoperability issues for your
    customers, then you CAN find it working with Digital.  From the tone of
    your base note, I'm pretty sure you have what it takes. 
    
    If you think you need a REAL stable, consistent working environment,
    well I'm not sure WHERE you would find that.
    
    I wish you well, however you decide, whatever happens.  I hope your
    "local group" of co-workers are a supportive bunch and that at least a
    few can keep a sense of humor.  That always helps.

    Well, thanks for trying, folks, but seems like only one person tried 
    to give me a reason to stay and it doesn't wash.  I'll be giving notice
    today.
    
    If anyone has the time to take over EASYNOTES.LIS, please send me mail.
    Keep in mind that this includes the VTX infobase.
    
    tom_p (author of .0)
    compuserve: 73303,1136
    internet:   [email protected]

        Sorry to see you leave Tom. You'll be missed. 

    For those of you who don't know, Tom has been a big help to the
    growth of Notes over the years. He wrote a computer aided instruction
    program for Note-11 for example. And he took over EASYNOTES.LIS when
    I had to give it up some three+ years ago.

    		Alfred

    BTW: I have a proposal for a corporate notes resource person that I
    keep updating and floating around looking for a sponsor. One of that
    persons jobs could be maintaining EASYNOTES.LIS. If anyone knows a
    likely funding source, the proposal is at
    LSTARK::LSTARK$DKA200:[PUBLIC]CNP.PS, feel free to pass my name, the
    proposal or both on. Or pass a likely name on to me.

    I too am sorry to see you go Tom, but yesterday I got a call from a
    headhunter, and I might have difficulty turning it down.  
    
    Larry
    

Take care Tom. I too am leaving DEC in 2 weeks and relocating to NC, so I
guess I couldn't think of a reason either ;-)

I will sure miss notes though.


Keith Barrett

    
    
    What are you doing in NC, Keith?

>    What are you doing in NC, Keith?

1. Buying my first house (in North Raleigh) :-)

2. Contract Employee with a Consulting Company.
   (I tried to find a DEC job in RTP, but none ever showed up in VTX)

3. Enjoying the fact I'll only be an 11 hour drive from Disney ;-)

4. Probably go back to school once things settle down (so I can keep my skill
   set "main stream").


If you're really interested, send me email.

Keith

.25>    Well, thanks for trying, folks, but seems like only one person tried 
.25>    to give me a reason to stay and it doesn't wash.  I'll be giving notice
.25>    today.
    
	If you were the anonymous author of .0, it just sounds to me
    	like you already had your mind set to leave and had .0 posted
    	to gain you what you already knew you would most likely get from 
    	this conference -- affirmation.  No real convincing was sought.  
    	Just encouragement.  In my opinion, of course.
    
    	If most noters were like me, they simply blew past the topic.  
    	Who wants to respond to someone who seems so pre-soured to 
    	anything positive?  What would you have done had someone
    	bothered to try and change your mind?  You make your reply sound 
    	like there was nothing convincing to say.  If you really wanted 
    	to stay here, you wouldn't have needed convincing from noters 
    	here.  
    
    	So you got what you wanted.  Bye.

    I was very surprised by what I read here as replies to .0.  There seems
    to have been a dramatic attitude change over the last year or so.  I've
    seen others post goodbye notes and get replies from people who were
    shocked or dismayed that the poster was leaving.  The attitude now
    seems to be 'get out if you can' or 'oh well, there goes another one'. 
    No one seems to be able to give a reason to stay any more.
    
    I've been here 12 years.  I'm not thrilled about leaving but I don't
    see things getting any better.  I was hoping that maybe someone else
    had a better vantage point and could say 'things aren't as bad as they
    seem'.  The response I got was 'they're worse'.
    
    I've seen the bad times before.  But I've never seen attitudes toward
    the company before that were so negative, even in the worst of times.
    
    tom_p

    I've gotten sort of numb in a way.  I like my job now.  I have always
    liked the people I work with.  I have always wished them the best.  It
    used to be that when someone left Digital I felt loss for them.  But,
    when I saw that Digital was PAYING people to leave, I felt
    disenchanted, even envious of those who left and took with them a tidy
    sum.  Now ...  now, I just wish folks the best whether their change of
    job leads them into or out of Digital.  
    
    Steve

    Why does a corporation of Digitals size require 100 (+) Vice
    Presidents?  Chrysler has 30 VP's and they manage quite well.
    
    Perhaps the BOD should have hired Lee I. since he is available now.
    
    Dave

    Speaking as someone who decided *not* to leave, there's really not
    much I can say to you to convince you to stay.  I'm not staying because
    I think the points in .0 are not really problems, or because I decided
    that my own concerns that caused me to consider leaving are invalid.  
    It's hard to explain why I *am* staying!  But part of it is that I
    am not *yet* willing to give up on this place.  We were great -- we
    could be again.  I decided to stick around and keep fighting, both
    for good graphics products (my regular job) and for ethics and
    accountability (something we need more people speaking out on).
    
    So I can't tell you that everything will be ok (or even tolerable) 
    if you stay -- I can only say that I personally am not ready to quit
    fighting yet.  And every now and then I see a sign of hope.  For
    example, the manager 3 levels up from me was recently hired from
    IBM -- is that good or bad?  Good, as it turns out -- he knows
    what our problems are and has plans on how to fix them.  He proved
    this by giving his group a presentation that he first gave to the SLT, 
    which he told us was designed to make them break out in a cold sweat
    about the serious problems that Digital faces making Alpha succeed.
    The purpose was to convince them to *act* on the problems that he
    described.  The purpose in telling us all of this was to show us that
    the problems *are* being acted on and to convince us to not give up.
    The positive crowd reaction showed that he make his point.
    
    So that was encouraging.  It's still only part of the problem, but
    occasional events like that are enough for me to keep fighting.  It's
    not enough for me to advise someone else to stay against their own
    better judgement, though.
    
    		Luck,
    		Larry

    PS:   I'd better explain that the serious problems I referred to in 
    the previous message are not anything specifically related to Alpha 
    -- they are the same problems that *every* company faces when launching
    a revolutionary new product.  Alpha *is* revolutionary (contrary to
    the line our competitors are trying to sell) and making it succeed
    requires both managers who understand the special problems of a
    revolutionary product and employees ready to fight to make it win.
    That was the message:  *now* is the time when working hard and working
    well will make Alpha a big success.  So let's do it!
    
    Contrast this to the other kind of message that we get too often:
    some senior manager saying that sure, we're doing things (e.g. about
    ethics), but there isn't any serious problem that needs to be solved.  
    There are two problems with this kind of communication:
    
    1)  It tells managers that they don't really need to change anything.
    2)  It tells employees who think there *is* a problem that the senior 
        manager doesn't understand (and won't fix) the real problem.
    
    A dose of reality is a wonderfully refreshing tonic -- it can make a
    moribund organization really wake up and start moving.  Within Digital,
    it's time for *more* reality and *more* honest communication that is
    directed toward solving problems, not minimizing them.  That is how
    I personally try to conduct myself and that's what I'm staying to do.
    
    		Enjoy,
    		Larry

    Re:  .36
    
    >                              Alpha *is* revolutionary (contrary to
    >the line our competitors are trying to sell)
   
    Isn't it more evolutionary than revolutionary?
    
    ...petri
    

    a "revolution" is probably better marketing than an "evolution". 
    People tend to think of good things associated with a revolution, like
    it's suddenness and freedom.
    
    Evolution moves slowly and is rooted in the past.  "What did Alpha
    evolve from?" is a question that would likely be asked.
    
    Mark

>    a "revolution" is probably better marketing than an "evolution". 
>    People tend to think of good things associated with a revolution, like
>    it's suddenness and freedom.
    
    	This is a peculiarly U.S.-centric view of a revolution, where the
    word is mainly associated with wholesale slaughter of German
    mercenaries. In most countries, "revolution" is associated with a
    sudden reduction in population, and in Britain at least, with father
    and son fighting on opposite sides in the same battle.  As for freedom,
    tell that to Iranian women. One of the reasons for the revolution there
    was that the Shah was proposing to give them the vote and permit
    them not to wear veils! Or tell it to the Russians after their
    revolution put Stalin in power.
    
    	Try the term "civil war". It has almost the same meaning as
    "revolution".
    
    	And a system that runs Unix faster than you could a year ago sounds
    to me like just the latest step in 20 years of evolution.

>      <<< Note 2670.39 by PASTIS::MONAHAN "humanity is a trojan horse" >>>

You don't accept the (somewhat metaphorical) interpretation of revolution
as a channge in thinking or approach?    

>    	Try the term "civil war". It has almost the same meaning as
>    "revolution".

The difference between a civil war and a revolution is who wins/won.

>    	And a system that runs Unix faster than you could a year ago sounds
>    to me like just the latest step in 20 years of evolution.

Then what's a system that can run several operating systems at once?

- tom]

>Then what's a system that can run several operating systems at once?

An ICL 1906A running George 4 in the early 1970s?

Hey, you could even run George under George.

    > .... several operating systems at once.
    
    A Rainbow?

    
    Let's stick with "Alpha is Evolving" before some marketing type comes
    up with a "Alpha is Revolting" slogan.
    
    C

    
    >> .... several operating systems at once.
    >
    >A Rainbow?

    The Rainbow generally only ran one at a time. Though there was a CP/M
    emulator that ran under DOS. That's how I ran BASIC and a spreadsheet
    for years.

    The IBM 360/370 series did of course run multiple operating systems at
    the same time on the order of 20 years ago. So that's hardly a new or
    revolutionary idea.

    			Alfred

    >    Try the term "civil war". It has almost the same meaning as
    >"revolution".
   
   "Civil War" is not nearly as upbeat as "Revolution."

> Then what's a system that can run several operating systems at once?

What operating systems can you run on an Alpha at once?

If you run VMS, you're not running OSF/1 or Windows NT on it.

If you run OSF/1, you're not running VMS or Windows NT on it.

If you run Windows NT, you're not running VMS or OSF/1 on it.

And if Windows NT has emulation for DOS and Win16, it hardly
means you're running several operating systems at once (and
on Alpha or MIPS you don't even have the OS/2 subsystem that's
available on Windows NT under Intel).

If OS/2 and DOS are classified as operating systems, then today's
OS/2 on Intel can boot OS/2 and boot a copy of DOS under it (it
has built-in DOS emulation, but if that one's not good enough,
you can really start a real copy of DOS under it).

As mentioned, e.g., IBM's VM (Virtual Machine) systems are an example
very old (in terms of computing history) of single systems truly 
running multiple operating systems at once.


...petri

    re: .40
    >Then what's a system that can run several operating systems at once?
    
    	We did have one - the A1 security kernel would run multiple copies
    of VMS and Ultrix on the same VAX 8800 at the same time, but that
    project was cancelled. As others have pointed out, we were very late in
    the game since several other manufacturers had that sort of
    capabilities in the mid 1970's. At around that time we had a moonlight
    project that allowed you to run OS/8 under RSTS/E. As a result of 
    cancellation of the A1 security kernel I don't think we have any 
    product currently.
    
    	If you didn't actually mean "simultaneously" then I can think of at
    least 8 operating systems you could run on a PDP-11, 4 on a PDP-8, 4 on
    a PDP-15,...

    There are plenty of conferences where the question "is alpha
    revolutionary?" can be asked and be given a detailed critique by
    people who are very familiar with both Alpha and its competition.
    And, what's more, where that's in the charter of the conference!
    VAXWRK::ALPHANOTES is a good example.
    
    For purposes of this file, I'll simply note that it's easy to
    focus on questions (e.g. how fast does it run Unix system calls)
    that don't expose the ways in which Alpha APX is revolutionary.
    Anything that is revolutionary in too many ways cannot be sold!
    Steve Jobs found out to his (and Next's) cost.
    
    Now back to our regularly scheduled digression...
    
    		Enjoy,
    		Larry

	
    re .39
    
>>    a "revolution" is probably better marketing than an "evolution". 
>>    People tend to think of good things associated with a revolution, like
>>    it's suddenness and freedom.
>    
>    	This is a peculiarly U.S.-centric view of a revolution, where the
    
    Well, the English talk about 'the Glorious Revolution' ...
    

But that was a bloodless one but only for a short while.

The glorious revolution resulted in William of Orange on the throne.
This resulted in...

	Surpression of the Scots.
	Surpression of the Irish.

Well I wont go in to the justification of the actions...
We dont have the perspective of the time to reasonably query the decisions
but revolutions usually result in higher mortality, even the the gloroius
revolution. This revolution produced some of the best modifications to the
British constitution. Well you cant make an omelette without breaking eggs
however explain that to a would be chicken!