diff --git a/.obsidian/core-plugins.json b/.obsidian/core-plugins.json index 8353455..cb5e4e4 100644 --- a/.obsidian/core-plugins.json +++ b/.obsidian/core-plugins.json @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ "random-note": false, "outline": true, "word-count": true, - "slides": false, + "slides": true, "audio-recorder": false, "workspaces": false, "file-recovery": true, diff --git a/timestamped/2026-05-21_08-12-01.md b/timestamped/2026-05-21_08-12-01.md index 57f1ed6..323befb 100644 --- a/timestamped/2026-05-21_08-12-01.md +++ b/timestamped/2026-05-21_08-12-01.md @@ -15,9 +15,10 @@ requiring that we change several designations. He asked if this was a common occurrence, I replied that he should expect it to happen a couple dozen times per project. + I've said often that I'm obsessive in my takeoff -with the expectation that I will need to change most takeoffs, +with the expectation that I will need to change most of them, but I only realized then that I am not expecting a revision to the RFP documents, but that my understanding of the requirements will change -as I make new discoveries in takeoff. +as I make new discoveries during the takeoff process. diff --git a/timestamped/2026-05-22_11-57-18.md b/timestamped/2026-05-22_11-57-18.md index d4455ed..001db96 100644 --- a/timestamped/2026-05-22_11-57-18.md +++ b/timestamped/2026-05-22_11-57-18.md @@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ See [[pdi-labor-plan]]. > A less cautious man than I might wonder > if the negative bias apparent in Bid and ConEst > is indicative of systematic [[incentives|incentive]] gaming, -> since if it we could change nothing of our process +> since if it were undesirable +> we could change nothing of our process > and simply add contingency to address it. *** diff --git a/timestamped/2026-05-27_21-32-16.md b/timestamped/2026-05-27_21-32-16.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ff732e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/timestamped/2026-05-27_21-32-16.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +--- +id: 2026-05-27T21:32:16-0400 +title: 2026-05-27 21:32:16 +tags: [] +daily: "[[2026-05-27]]" +--- +# 2026-05-27 21:32:16 + +While working on [[telecom-takeoff]] for [[303-mariposa-residence]] +[[jared-defanti]] used (2) Cat5e + (1) RG6 assemblies for most outlets. +We determined that (3) Cat5e assemblies would likely be required instead. +Because the required assemblies do not exist, +and the takeoff would have to be deleted +and replaced with [[heating-designations]], +I suggested leaving the existing work alone, +citing that the limited information +makes likely our superiors will have a different interpretation than us. +**If we changed the takeoff then** +**we would have to change it again.** + +> Ultimately we did change the takeoff +> because there were less than a dozen outlets in the project. + +*** + +This is a good example of a scope question +which I believe should be saved for review, +not raised with the senior. + +1. The maximum project cost impact of the decision is low, + being only the difference between RG6 and Cat5e. + +2. The result of the decision will not affect our future takeoff. + +3. We would waste more of the senior's time + in the overhead of explaining the project and the issue early, + than if it has to be fixed during the allotted time they prepared for.