Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Intern? Bloggers Need Not Apply 253

Posted by Zonk
from the keep-off-the-blog-sign dept.
westlake writes "Short, funny, and to the point, a good read from the NYT about the realities of blogging in the corporate world." From the article: "Most experienced employees know: Thou Shalt Not Blab About the Company's Internal Business. But the line between what is public and what is private is increasingly fuzzy for young people comfortable with broadcasting nearly every aspect of their lives on the Web, posting pictures of their grandmother at graduation next to one of them eating whipped cream off a woman's belly. For them, shifting from a like-minded audience of peers to an intergenerational, hierarchical workplace can be jarring."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intern? Bloggers Need Not Apply

Comments Filter:
  • by Southpaw018 (793465) * on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:35PM (#15405777) Journal
    My coworkers and I were sharing stories at lunch the other day; thankfully, my office is blissfuly absent of corporate culture ("professional, but relaxed"). A coworker who has a daughter my age said that when her daughter started working as a receptionist at a hospital, she came home after a few months on the job and said "Mom...you never told me Dilbert was real..."
    • Hospitals are notoriously bad about their corporate culture, because there is absolutely NO accountability for ANYONE. Most of the staff is essentially unfireable because their skills are in high demand or they're in a union (or both, as in the unfortunate case of nurses). And most hospitals are effectively a monopoly (ambulances can't exactly perform a credit-check to decide where to take you...) and have a captive market.

      I'm sure there are a few corporate environments that are worse, but they're proba

      • Re:Hospitals (Score:4, Interesting)

        by 70Bang (805280) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @08:46PM (#15406402)


        (all of this known, first-hand)
        Hospitals are sieves...for the most part. I can cite a current situation where things were kept very clandestine due to the extreme nature of what was going on. The press largely chose to skip over it which shocked me.

        Nurses aren't unfireable, per se, regardless of how endangered a species they appear to be. It just costs more to lure some of them out of hiding. Nurses are, however, almost the lifeblood of a facility as there are few things they can't & don't do, out of care for the patients as much as pure necessity. You don't see orderlies any more. It's not unusual for a minimum of the staff, working directly or indirectly for the hospital, to be more than 1/3 nurses. There's only one thing which nurses do not cope with very well: hospitals which offshore nurses; i.e., bring in 3rd-world nurses. There is almost nothing they won't do -- trumping the nurses we believe so strongly in. Fortunately, this is a rare, rare situation.

        The group (en masse) which has virtually no accountability to the hospital is that which has a lot of M.D. and other related abbreviated diplomas and licenses. They rarely work directly for the hospital but instead, for a separate organization which more or less dovetails into hospitals' structures such that it's as if they are working for the hospital. The bridge is usually someone who works in a department labelled (or similarly labelled) Medical Affairs.

        Something hospital staff (including MDs, RNs[1], and even housekeeping have to be reminded of is not to talk about what they see, hear, or participate in or outside of the hospital. (re: patients) Most people would be surprised how much "indirect" shop talk takes place after a shift over a few drinks and even with specific clues left out, it's possible to identify whom they are talking about. What's worse is when they do it in the hallways or elevators and may be sharing hearing space with family or friends of the patient(s) they are discussing.


        ____________________________________
        [1] You'll notice I abhore using the "grocer's apostrophe" with acronyms. I hate seeing "MD's", "RN's", "PC's". It's gotten so bad people will post ads in real newspapers ala "Schedule Party's With Us!".

        Actually, the purpose for this footnote was to point out how many nurses and technicians (doctors don't seem to do it very much) say, "I'm headed to the OR|ER room".


        • Nurses are, however, almost the lifeblood of a facility as there are few things they can't & don't do, out of care for the patients as much as pure necessity. You don't see orderlies any more.

          Sure you do - they're just called nurse's aides now. These are the people who do stuff like wipe the butts and change the sheets of patients who shit themselves in the middle of the night. (I'm serious.)

          For every 2 or so nurses in most units, there is 1 nurse's aide. There have to be more nurses because they hav
          • In the meantime, they can work as a medical assistant or nurse's aide. (And yeah, as a nurse's aide you'd better be prepared to do anything.)

            hehe [azstarnet.com]

        • Re:Hospitals (Score:3, Insightful)

          by GeckoX (259575)
          This and other posts discussing corporate culture, but using the US medical & hospital system as an example...OH MY GOD. Could you pick a WORSE example? Or are you begging for another endless argument about the problems with a private madical system in the first place?

          All I will say is THANK GOD I'm a canadian so I don't even have to THINK of this kind of bullshit. Primary medical care is a basic need, and ONLY the best people for the job should be hired and retained. There is NO logical argument to the
          • Re:Hospitals (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Bob Uhl (30977)
            Food and clothing are basic needs to, yet the State shouldn't be providing them. The State should not be in the business of satisfying basic needs, period: its sole role is to punish those who violate the rights of others.
      • Re:Hospitals (Score:2, Insightful)

        by cubicledrone (681598)
        as in the unfortunate case of nurses

        Yes, it's unfortunate that people who dedicate their lives to the care of the sick and injured can't be fired by some blow-dried corporate fuck because his golf game got canceled.

        • The problem is when a lazy nurse that does more harm than good can't be fired. Admittedly this isn't a terrible problem in many hospitals, but in types of medical care it can become a major issue. Psych hospitals are a good example. Psych nursing has a high burnout rate among competent, caring nurses. As a result, a majority of psych nurses are lazy, incompetent, and don't give a shit. This in turn just increases the burnout rate among the good ones because they have to do the majority of the work. Th
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:35PM (#15405781)
    Don't use your real name on your blog, you idiot!
  • by Jim in Buffalo (939861) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:41PM (#15405804)
    I don't know if it's all that different from when I was first entering the workplace, but today's youngsters put it all out there. I don't know where kids get the idea that the only ones who would ever look at their MySpace blogs are people in their own age group.
  • Blackmail (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KefabiMe (730997) <garth@NOSpaM.jhonor.com> on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:43PM (#15405823) Journal

    I determined a while ago that any private material that becomes public material can be used against you. In about 20 years I expect a metric shit-ton of blackmail material will be available for our future up-and-coming politicians. (Thank you MySpace for embarrassing our future politicians!)

    Of course, because I'm smart enough to keep private matters private, I'm automatically disqualified from politics. (Yay!)

    Hint: No matter how awesome that frat party was (I don't care *how* crazy those midgets where!), it's probably not a good idea to post those pics until your hangover is gone.

    • Black-mail material only has power if:

      A) It is something that doesn't fit "the norm"
      B) It can be used to set you apart from peers

      Bear in mind that in 20 years, most of those bloggers are going to make up a significant (if not majority) chunk of the voting population.

      We cannot assume that morality as it applies today will remain unchanged 20 years from now. I mean, there was a time it was indecent for a woman to show any leg above the knee; what won't be taboo in 20 years will probably shock you. And that
  • by hguorbray (967940) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:45PM (#15405829)
    On the other hand -if we encouraged all of the Poli Sci, Business and Law students to not only blog, but to also to post pictures of their exploits on myspace we might be able to weed out some of our future idiot/corrupt politicos and business people.

    Just think if this have been around in the '80s when King George was partying his brains out....

    -What's the Speed of Dark?
  • by gazpacho (18802) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:45PM (#15405830) Homepage
    Was the woman his grandmother? I wouldn't hire that dude at all.
    • Was the woman his grandmother? I wouldn't hire that dude at all.

      If you are really that rash, I don't want to work for you. The problem with a non free economy is that I might not have a choice.

      As large companies are increasingly favored, the assholes win. When society and government tolerate blatantly anti-competitive behavior, your ability to switch jobs or start your own business dissapears. The assholes in any company realize this and abuse their subordinates as they please. The subordinate has the

      • If everyone posts stupid things on their blogs (which is FINE...) then there is a big chance that manager-types will also be guilty. Long-term, this can only causes a long-needed shift in "Corporate Culture".

        (The funny thing about "corporate culture" is that it's self-inflicted. Every suits-type feel the need to wear a stupid tie, but all (almost...) agree it's stupid...)

        I say, post whatever you want on your blogs, or anywhere. Being turned down from a job (you wouldn't like anyway, if the managemen

        • I've been turned down from a few jobs because of tattoos but to me it always was a filter for shallow, control-freak managers and good dudes.

          Couldn't get away with that in Seattle and a few other places I can think of, at least if you are hiring for any kind of technical or creative position.

          I mean who care if the DBA has tattoos, long blue hair, and facial piercings as long as they know what they are doing.
  • Acting like an idiot in public can hurt your job prospects. Acting like an idiot in a world wide, semi perpetual, archived and instantly accessible forum can *really* hurt your career.

    Lets not couch this in terms of some kind of cultural divide. These people are putting things in public that should be private and then suprised by their own ignorance.
    • Lets not couch this in terms of some kind of cultural divide. These people are putting things in public that should be private and then surprised by their own ignorance.

      Human nature has not been changed by blogging. Everyone has their moments and they are witnessed in public. If you work for a company long enough, people will get to know you and your faults. The difference between then and now is that now people don't have to go on word of mouth, they can see the pictures themselves.

      It has nothing to d

      • It has nothing to do with job performance.

        Sure it does. Your example of everyone "having their moments" in public is not the same as deliberately choosing to then describe, link to, and post photographs documenting your "moments." Those are usually moments that seem funny because they are outrageous while still endearing within your peer group, or don't seem too offensive by your own generation's standards... but those who have been raised with the web at their fingertips have absolutely no excuse for no
      • Companies require at least an image of professionalism. If you don't at least make an effort to keep your quirky shit to yourself in public, you are a liability to the image of the company, and thus the company iteslf. Being indiscreet is, believe it or not, both a vice and a business detriment.

        So, yes, it has everything to do with job performance. It means that you're less qualified to do the job than the other 100 (or other 1000000, if you do anything in the computer field) people that applied.
  • Everybody I've read about that got fired for having a blog is on to such great things," said Kelly Kreth, 36, who was fired from her job as the marketing and public relations director at a real estate firm in Manhattan last fall for blogging about her co-workers.

    "I've had my online diary for six years, and it is very important to me," Ms. Kreth said, calling the firing the best thing that happened to her. "It led to me opening my own business and making triple what I was making before."

    Step 1. Get Job
    Step 2

  • A chilling future (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:50PM (#15405864)

    OK, I've heard the "information wants to be free" mantra a zillion times, and I've met my fair share of people who think their right to free speech (no matter what they're saying and what the consequences will be) trumps anything else.

    I've seen an absurd story on the news today about a British woman who was prosecuted for indecent exposure, because she had the audacity to sunbathe nude in her own garden. (She was acquitted, but the comments by both the public prosecutor and the judge were profoundly inappropriate, and no-one seems to have taken any action against the "offended" neighbour who videoed the nude sunbather without her permission - something that probably is illegal under the recent Sexual Offences Act.)

    You know the thing that really scared me today? A professor (in the UK sense, i.e., a very senior academic) talking about the "semantic web" and implying that in a few years, everyone will have a unique "Internet ID", and everything from their personal details to pictures of their wedding will be on-line for all to look up, instantly and reliably.

    Choosing to share your personal information with the world is one thing, though I suspect a great many of the enthusiastic youngsters supporting trendy web sites today will regret it one day. Choosing to share others' personal information with the world is an entirely different thing, and I'm not sure I want to live in a world where everything about you is assumed to be public knowledge.

    Maybe I'm just biased, since a bitter ex of mine did once post intimate and formerly private personal messages on her blog (but edited and with modified dates). It just seems to me that this sort of thing is happening ever more often: it's assumed that no-one you deal with has a private life, and if you know it, it's perfectly fine to share it with others. I guess the whole posting confidential company information thing is just another nail in the coffin: as the saying goes, privacy is dead, and we have killed it.

    It's tragic, and it's even more tragic that most people don't even realise. Yet.

  • by Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:51PM (#15405869)
    "What would Google show?" is a question you need to ask yourself when applying for a job. Employers increasingly Google the name of prospective employees. Not for the mail room job, but certainly for management level positions or those with security implications or even just those above some annual salary level. You also need to remember that with huge caches that shit doesn't go away even if you try to disappear it. What you thought was cool at 20 may not seem so to someone you are asking to pay you 100k at 30.
    • Pay attention, boys. Following several mystifying cases where a great job interview was followed by a withdrawal of interest, I went over my blog and carefully chucked all the truly shocking stuff under "offensive post" introductions with a "more" link.

      I got a solid offer the next week. Connect the dots.
      • Fortunately a Google search on my name shows B and C actors that share my name. I am in a technical field, but Googling with more technical terms still pull up a researcher in England that shares my name. I get to stay fairly anonymous on Google, which is a good thing unless you need to be known to be successful (like if you are a writer, actor, politician, musician ...)
    • Yeah, it's funny that the oldest surviving reference to me on the internet - from 1997 - is still the first Google hit on my name. (From the misheard lyric archive.) Fortunately it's not too bad...

      The other hits are all from 2000 or later, and all of them are decently respectable.
    • Just me wondering, how well would a Google bomb work?
    • A good rule of thumb , never use your real name online for anything that doesn't need it.
      I am fairly open about my life and work, but I am not that open about where and who I am. Change a few details , omit company and private names and you are a bit safer.

      Freedom of speech is important, and so is freedom of understanding of said speech. So you will influence peoples opinions of you due to your speech, it is part and package of it. If they don't know who said it, they can't hold it against you.
      • A good rule of thumb , never use your real name online for anything that doesn't need it. I am fairly open about my life and work, but I am not that open about where and who I am. Change a few details, omit company and private names and you are a bit safer.

        Exactly. Use a pseudonym or alias for your personal ramblings. Encourage your friends to do so as well. And be very careful never to let the two mix. This makes it easy for friends to keep up with your life, but difficult for strangers to simply se
    • This is one very good reason to create a personal website and keep it full of somewhat useful yet harmless information. That way, when somebody google's you, they get you rather than someone else's opinion about you. Just a thought...
    • "What would Google show?" is a question you need to ask yourself when applying for a job.

      Googling my name shows a 5th grader who made a garden, some actress who was in a musical with Frank Astaire, there's a font with my name (yay!), and a shitload of genealogy reports of people not related to me.

      I've never actually gotten any decent results when googling a random non-famous person I've met, so I'm not sure why HR directors would waste their time bothering.
      • >I've never actually gotten any decent results when googling a random non-famous person I've met, so I'm not sure why HR directors would waste their time bothering.

        It really depends on your name. If your name is Jim Smith of Ellen Jones, then Google isn't much good without some additional filter. On the other hand, my real name is unusual, so it's pretty much all me and ten pages worth. Your mileage may vary depending on your name.

      • Depends on the name. I'm probably the only guy in the world with my name, the first several pages are all me. Around page 4 or so it goes to some celebrity in Asia with the same last name.
    • Man, I hate what google shows about me. Namely, a horrible webpage I created in high school (nearly a decade ago) and lost the password to a couple years later. I apparently used fake address etc info, because Tripod won't let me into it or delete it for me, and the email address it's registered under no longer exists. I can't believe Tripod is still wasting server space on a page that hasn't been touched in at least 7-8 years. *sigh*

      At least now that I'm married and I've added my married name to my maide

    • What would Google show, eh?

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of fake websites set up to impersonate the writings of another. Google might say that's the person's history, but it could be entirely written by trolls.
  • Why differentiate? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What is it about the word "blog" that makes people stupid?

    "It is important that corporations make a choice as to what type of blogging they will allow," said Alfred C. Frawley III, director of the intellectual property practice group at the law firm Preti Flaherty in Portland, Me.

    Why does blogging need a different set of rules than any other medium for communication?

    If there is something your company doesn't want disclosed, have the lawyers draft up the paperwork. Just for kicks, we'll call it a "non

  • by Sentri (910293) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:55PM (#15405895) Homepage
    Someone put forward the theory to me the other day that we like Celebrities (and I use the term 'we' here loosely) because we miss the sense of community our tribal ancestors had. Celebrities fill the gap because they provide a familiarity with faces and shared stories that link us to other people around the world.

    Blogging seems to extend this idea (ideal?) by making peoples stories more openly shared. For example, I read http://www.waiterrant.net/ [waiterrant.net] and http://www.oblivio.com/ [oblivio.com], I know their stories even though they live in new york, and somehow the world feels smaller and less disparate. Added to that, I have a few friends who read the same blogs, we both know their stories (or at least the stories they choose to tell).

    It brings back that sense of community a little.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:58PM (#15405916)
    Shouldn't "eating whipped cream off a woman's belly" be a link above?
  • by megla (859600) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @06:59PM (#15405922)
    Anyone dumb enough to post their company's innermost secrets on their blog deserves exactly what they get.
    Similarly, any boss who fires an employee simply on the basis that they have a blog, regardless of content, deserves some sort of dressing down - although this is harder to achieve.

    People are too often pushed into very polarised positions on the matter, which helps no-one. There's plenty of acceptable middle ground, if only someone could bring reasonable discussion to the table.
    • Similarly, any boss who fires an employee simply on the basis that they have a blog, regardless of content, deserves some sort of dressing down - although this is harder to achieve.
      I'm guessing that, in most jurisdications, you can't fire someone simply because they have a blog. Now if the blogging uses company resources, or if the blog mentions the company, that's something else.

      Perhaps someone can advise on this.

  • by i am kman (972584) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @07:01PM (#15405934)
    Aaaahhh - damn. I knew I shouldn't use my real name when I registered. Oh god, what am I gonna do now - aaaahhhh.

    Actually, I think many people invent a psuedo-name and often don't realize when they've crossed the line from anonymous to identifiable when you look at the collection of what they post. The vastness of the internet makes people feel safe even when their standing naked in public.

    I've worked with 2 people who were fired over blogs they thought were quite anonymous, but it became quite clear who was writing them when you looked at the collection of posts. They both knew perfectly well if they were caught they'd be fired (and they should've been), but they also felt quite anonymous since they didn't use their 'real names. It's ALOT like folks that post 'anonymous' comments on stock boards.
    • I've always wondered... Even if specific, identifiable facts are omitted from "anonymous" online posts, would it be hard for a statistical/Bayesian system to pick out text written by a specific person given a sufficient corpus of material known to be from that person? Seems those techniques do a hell of a decent job with spam. I don't see how normal prose would be any different.

      Simply being anonymous may not be enough anymore. You may need to sufficiently change your prose style, which may be very dif

      • That may be true, in theory, but I imagine it would be difficult to get a large enough collection of sample material. Also, I think the various statistical and Bayesian filters only can go so far to say Spam or Not Spam. They can't identify a particular spammer or type of spammer. Applied to blogs, they may not be able to provide any more distinguishing detail than "seems to enjoy Douglas Adams and Monty Python."
    • I went to a pseudonym when Dejanews became popular. Ugh.
  • I thought that said "eating whipped cream off their grandmother's belly."

    Come to think of it, gotta be careful what you post at Slashdot: all that anti-Microsoft hatred that can get spewed could be problematic when The (Wo)Man goes to sign a paycheque.
  • About 5 years ago, I did a search on google for my boss. He did not have a very unique last name, so all I did was narrow searches down to vicinities he was likely to have lived in. It only took a few minutes. He was convinced it would be very difficult to find him on google becuase of his name. Problem is, anyone looking for you on google, would already know a little bit about you, and that is enough to dig up newspaper articles, jail records, resumes, and all sorts of stuff. I would rather not have m
    • Are you sure it was him and not someone with the same name? I have a relatively uncommon last name, but I know there's at least one person with the same name as me who lives in the same general area.
  • by rjstanford (69735) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @07:24PM (#15406048) Homepage Journal
    From TFA:

    But Comedy Central disagreed, asking him to change the name (He did, to "I'm an Intern in New York") and to stop revealing how its brand of comedic sausage is stuffed.

    "They said they figured something like this would happen eventually because blogs had become so popular," said Mr. McDonald, now 23, who kept his internship. "It caught them off guard. They didn't really like that."


    So, basically, they objected to him sharing potentially confidential information (fair enough) and to his using their name for his personal (readership/ad) gain. Again, fair enough. He still got to keep the blog, and he's still an intern there. Oh, and he didn't have the blog when he "applied," anyway.

    Le sigh. If the editors don't RTFA, what hope is there for the rest of the readership again?
  • I think that this shows the power of the internet. Mass communication is a tremendous source of power. It changes government policy and it is also a threat to corporate power and even the power of a school. Here's to the internet! Here's to blogging!

  • Your future bosses and the people interviewing you are also online, and may have interesting bits of information floating around there.

    If nothing else, it makes sense to include personal information searches in your "company background research" phase of interview preparation. The more you know, the better prepared you are.

    Jim
  • by xihr (556141)

    I fail to see why bloggers are perennially shocked by this. It really has nothing to do with blogging -- if you talk about company business in public, you're in danger of being fired. It's that simple.

    The fact that bloggers seem more inclined to blab publicly doesn't really affect anything to do with this. You talk about company business, you risk being fired. It doesn't matter whether or not you do it by leaking it to a reporter, talk about it in a bar, or post it on the Web for all to see.

    The mora

  • So basically the point here is that making the transition from being an irresponsible young idiot to being a responsible adult is a jarring experience. What a revelation!
  • Well, duh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by buss_error (142273) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @09:44PM (#15406718) Homepage Journal
    I'm amazed at the number of people that come to interviews and think I haven't run a search on their name through Google or other search engines.

    While I most likely wouldn't call anyone to an interview whose postings show indescretion, I often think of how I'd just like to see their face when I place a copy of their search results in front of them.

    Why do you think I post under a 'nym?

    • You wouldn't have much luck with me. My name turns up about a half dozen hits, two of which are my photo portfolio and 2 are deviantart listings that reference said portfolio.

      Then again, if you knew my most preferred pseduonyms... ;)
    • Re:Well, duh (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SatanicPuppy (611928) *
      Heh yea, my name is really common, and seems to be shared by a lot of really staid people so my few exploits under my real name don't show up against the general backdrop.

      If a prospective employer knew enough to look in the right place, it would be a different story. I'm not ashamed to own up to anything I've put online, but I don't necesarrily want to have a person who doesn't know me well forming a snap judgement on a random sampling of material.
  • I regret nothing! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Thursday May 25, 2006 @10:50PM (#15407042) Homepage Journal
    I do appreciate the value of discretion for people in these lines of work. However, I did silly things under pseudonyms for ages on the Internet - still do, actually - and it is pretty easily traceable to me in RL. And I've realized I don't regret any of it.

    I'm no intern, nor am I an up-and-coming executive. The sort of life I'm looking for and the "adult" lifestyle I pursue is one that's totally compatible with some random guy who makes bad jokes on message boards, produces cheaply done artwork, remixes pop music without permission, writes "Doctor Who" fanfic, is a member of a pagan coven, MCs cheezy presentations at hacker cons, and posts strange dreams to livejournal. I may not ever make partner in the prestigious XYZ firm, I may not ever break six figures, but I'll be somewhere doing something that is compatible with someone like me.

    So, having things on my "permanent record" like the stuff I've done with phonelosers.org or 2600 or whatever else is strangely liberating in its way, because it pretty much forces me into putting my money where my mouth is and seeking out a lifestyle I'd be happy in, rather than one I'll endure for the sake of appearances.

    Hi, my name is Rob, and I'm Googleable.

    • OK, the cheaply done artwork is fine - I mean who doesn't like to doodle. And, I can even understand the pagan coven - I mean, we all have to nurture our spiritual side. But the Dr. Who fanfic? That's sick man. You should get some counselling. Oh well, at least it's not Star Trek...
  • by ZorbaTHut (126196)
    In a year or so I'm going to be in a position to hire people. And yeah, I'm going to look at their blogs if I can find them. I might object to people talking about how they plan to fuck up every job they have, or chatting amiably about how much money they stole from their last employer, and so on and so forth.

    But assuming they're not an obvious asshole, I'd actually *prefer* employees who have a sense of fun and a life. I'd rather see a blog talking, side-by-side, about work and home life and parties - or e
  • I would claim it a simply paranoia and simply misunderstaning HOW real life happens that I get in politics, how I get work, etc.

    Yep, clever people sometimes do stupid or "uneasy for everyone" things, but usually are sorry about that, so almost everyone forgives them, forgets that and life moves on. Beatles haven't lost nothing of their star power when they admitted they used stimulators while rock'n'rolling in Hamburg. And let's be clear - most people don't care HOW much you have been drunk in one party twe
  • too much fuss (Score:3, Insightful)

    by l3v1 (787564) on Friday May 26, 2006 @07:34AM (#15408544)
    [sarcastic half-joking mode on]

    Saying, writing, opening up to the wide audience your stupidity, wierdness, incompetence, intolerance, ignorance, unability to filter private information from useless public stuff, bad spelling, lack of imagination, lack of social life, bad or lacking love life, low skills in problem solving, bad opinions about certain companies, lacking technical skills, etc. etc. and you'd still expect a decent company to hire you ?

    Thing is, on this planet, you can always be certain that there does indeed exist at least one person that is dumber than you. So, all you have to do is find that person and convince him/her to hire you.

    If you can't imagine that some things in your life should be kept private (I'm not talking about kinky habits or any disgusting behavior and such, just simple things) then I can't imagine you working with or for me.

As the trials of life continue to take their toll, remember that there is always a future in Computer Maintenance. -- National Lampoon, "Deteriorata"

Working...