351–360 of 662 posts
>Rule #2: Take a long hard look at a candidate’s social profiles. That worries me if I need to enter the job market. I have no social media profile with my name attached to it. I don't enjoy the facebook/twitter/instagram style sites.
> However, I am glad that I caught it early before we hired him. If we had hired him, tough to say what could have happened. Maybe he would have been great and our best performing AE. Maybe he wouldn’t have even known how to log into Salesforce. When you make it to the top by lying, you're considered a winner: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-goldman-gary-cohn-got-to-... > "I lied to him all the way to the airport,…
Everyone lies, because the interviewing process itself is a fucking joke, ESPECIALLY in the Bay Area. If the person can answer all my questions and they have a good attitude, I honestly don't give a shit what got them to that point. If someone doesn't work out, you can fire them. Yes it's "exhausting", maybe if it's so difficult to manage or run a business you should find a different role for yourself. I really enjoy…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Question: What is freemasonry about and why did you join it? I read up on them quite a bit but I just didn't find any good examples of actual goals and activities they are pursuing. Do Masons have a hacker mentality?
The path to becoming a mason is first by reaching out to your local lodge. The person who responds can help you with the process. Beyond masons, there are the elks, the moose, and in parts of the West Clampers. Each have their lodges, their rituals, and focus. I started the mason path, but life got busy. I’m a Moose member and a Clamper. In all cases, the focus is community. In most cases, and this is what I apprecia…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Question: What is freemasonry about and why did you join it? I read up on them quite a bit but I just didn't find any good examples of actual goals and activities they are pursuing. Do Masons have a hacker mentality?
It’s important to note that most responses here will come from Americans, who aren’t exactly known for their Masonic ideological purity. I probably wouldn’t care about an American candidate, but I would never consider hiring someone who turns out to be a European Freemason any more than I would hire a neo-nazi.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's talking about the actual definition of contractor according to US law. If a person does not have the right to choose how, where, when, and by what means the work is done, they're not a contractor. https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
this is interesting heuristic guidance on taxes, but this doesn't describe labor or contract law, as far as i can tell. your link even notes: > There is no “magic” or set number of factors that “makes” the worker an employee or an independent contractor, and no one factor stands alone in making this determination. Also, factors which are relevant in one situation may not be relevant in another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just my $0.02... I have worked some jobs as an employee, some as a contractor, and in my experience there is really no difference between the two, other than how taxes (and social security, etc) are handled. My contracting jobs did not give me any more flexibility (and probably all had this "don't use a subcontractor" clause). How much leeway I had in choosing "the time, place, and manner of my work" depended entirel…
That is reality of how contracting jobs are in the current environment, but it is circumventing the law. I also have worked contracting jobs where I had to be there 9-5 and implement the exact architecture outlines by one employee of the client, while the boss I answered to on a daily basis was another employee of the client and not my nominal boss at the consultancy. All of that is solely to get around to requiremen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You ever politely laugh at something you really didn't find all that funny? Human social interactions are built on small deceptions. Some amount of dishonesty is required if you want to avoid being an awkward social pariah. If you are incapable of any social dishonesty whatsoever, you will quickly be labeled an inappropriate, self righteous asshole. Of course there is a limit to those social norms. Dishonesty that ex…
I’m very worried that so many people here seem to think it’s impossible to be empathetic with people without being dishonest.
A proverb on the subject.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Their caste system makes it hard for “others” to be people, and we all know what happens when you dehumanize others. Since I have little experience with outsourcing to India, the implication here is mysterious to me. What are you getting at?
Let me relate a true story, and then discuss some implications. After dinner one night, many years ago, an Indian co-worker and I started discussing politics. The Indian wanted to know why we didn’t nuke Pakistan in our hunt for bin Laden. I said that the fallout would kill tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of his countrymen. His response? “They’re excess people.” If you don’t care about others, then you will use t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Avoiding answering a question directly does not make you dishonest. If my wife's grandmother had asked me how the food was (assuming the food was awful), I might say "it was very much appreciated" -- and I could say that with 100% honesty, because she would have put a lot of effort into it, and even if she failed, I appreciate that she tried. Or let's say she didn't try very hard (which would have been unlikely for e…
>Your statements can be 100% truthful, and yet not reveal all of your thoughts about a subject or situation. Having a filter doesn't make you dishonest. Some of your thoughts are unkind, some can be even downright evil at times. The fact that you don't reveal these things is often a sign of self control. Words have power, and they affect others around you. There's a reason everyone can't hear every thought you have.…
> You are carefully crafting a response to the question to make everyone believe that you liked the food without directly stating that.
NO -- see that's the problem. You're making a huge assumption that is incorrect.
"thank you for making it" does not mean "I liked it". And no, it won't make everyone believe that I liked the food (especially since that would not have been my intention in the first place). People aren't stupid. Most folks I know would realize in that situation that I wasn't directly answering the question. "thank you for making it" would not have been dishonest, and it would not mean "I liked the food".
> "Let's say she doesn't accept your dancing around the question? Are you going to keep crafting answers that are technically correct in attempt to make everyone think you liked the food?"
Firstly, you are wrong in your assessment that I would be attempting to make everyone think I liked the food -- in that situation that would not be my intention at all.
Secondly, if I was pressed I might try to move on with the conversation in a different way (without answering) -- which, again would not be dishonest. Not wanting to answer a question is not the same thing as dishonesty. I am not required to tell everyone what I think about everything in order to be honest.
If she kept pressing the question, I might try to answer the question nicely, like "It wasn't my favorite", or "I didn't care for it". Both of those answers would be honest. Being kind is not dishonesty, either. Even if it was one of the worst meals I'd ever eaten, both of those statements would be truthful.
"the effect is completely the same as if you'd just said it was great." -- No, I totally disagree with that. "It was great" would be a lie, "thank you for making it" expresses genuine gratitide for the effort made toward the meal.
You make it sound as though it is impossible to be tactful and truthful/honest at the same time. I disagree.
[ edited to remove a typo ]