scott wrote:
>> If you take out the word "small" it sounds like I did something really 
>> major.
> 
> Good.

Where I'm from, lying isn't good.

>> Similarly for the scripting; copying some files from A to B isn't 
>> exactly rocket science. It's not like I developed a major application. 
>> It's just some small utilities.
> 
> Which you'd be surprised how few people could actually get working.  
> Didn't you write something here about that automatic ping program you 
> wrote?  If you want, make a list of the titles of each small utility you 
> wrote to help with your job, it shows you can.

Mmm, OK...

>> Kwi?
> 
> Eh?

I had having trouble parsing the multiple negatives in your sentence.

>> Heh. Should I include the anicdote about the time I got so bored that 
>> I learned PostScript in my lunch break just for something to do? ;-) I 
>> think it's a great story, but I'm not sure whether I should actually 
>> mention it.
> 
> Yes mention it, not in that way, but list PS as one of the languages you 
> are "familiar" with, and even mention that you learnt how to use it in a 
> couple of hours if it fits in.

I was just listing the languages that readers are most likely to care 
about, but yeah, I guess I could add PostScript.

The point I was really trying to make is that "normal people" don't 
spend their lunch break learning new technical skills that they don't 
actually need for anything "just for the hell of it". Only seriously 
motivated people do that. (And yeah, the fact that it only took me a few 
hours to learn is good too. But motivation is surely good, eh?)

>> I suppose I could try to claim that the lab backup script I wrote 

> 
> Well go for it then, just say something like a script you wrote saved 
> the company needing to buy a commerical piece of software that would 
> have cost 8K.  They are not going to interrogate your manager to check 
> if this is exactly true, but they will probably ask you questions about 
> it so there's no point in lying.


Oracle consultant when our DB died... but it's not massively relevant here.

>> Well I'm *supposed* to work with the US dudes, and I'm *supposed* to 
>> be responsible for planning future upgrades. But frankly, nobody 
>> really bothers to communicate with me any more. I just find out about 
>> these decisions when new hardware arrives on the doorstep.
> 
> That's all discussion for the interview, when you can explain how you 
> try to improve the way the US dudes think about backup, protocols, 
> systems, documentation etc.  For the CV just put that you work with them 
> on the network infrastructure etc.

M'okay.

> In the CV you want to leave no doubt 
> about what you do, make it impossible for the person reading it to think 
> "oh well it looks like maybe he just does nothing each day".

The trouble is... I *do* do nothing each day! o_O

>> Do *you* see any GCSE results listed? I don't.
> 
> I see you said you got 3 GCSEs.

Hmmm... well spotted.

> That of course leads to the question 
> "does he only have 3 GCSEs? that's a bit weird.".  Take out the whole 
> line and don't even mention your school.  Leave in the bit at Milton 
> Keynes College if you want, but I am thinking you are a bit too old now 
> to be listing what you did before University, especially as it wasn't 
> via the normal "A levels" path - take it out altogether!

OK. That should free up some space...

>> You realise that the grades I mentioned are just the good ones, right?
> 
> Right, but C- sounds bad, and is worse than the others.  If they ask you 
> in the interview then you can explain that the grades go down to F or G 
> and that you got a C-.  A C- by itself looks bad and there's no space in 
> the CV to explain.

OK then.

>> [Nitpick: It was a 4-year course.]
> 
> That's why I suggested making it clearer what you did each year, and it 
> will then be obvious that it was a 4 year course and not force someone 
> to check the years and then guess if you took a year out or whatever.

Alright...

>> Does it matter? MVC is highly unlikely to be even remotely relevant to 
>> anything I'll be doing. (And it would take several paragraphs to 
>> explain.)
> 
> It doesn't matter if it's relevant or not, just write out the words 
> because someone who doesn't know what MVC stands for is going to feel 
> much better just seeing the words (even if they don't understand) 
> compared to if they just see MVC.  Can you not just write a couple more 
> sentences about the project, how much of your time did it take up, 
> individual or group project etc?

Well MVC is.. uh... a GUI technology. And my project was to make it so 
that the UI can be on a different machine to the backend. But with less 
network overhead than X11 / VNC / RDP / other bitmap-based technologies, 
and more responsiveness than HTML over HTTP.

(Of course, today people don't care any more. They just use HTTP for 
*everything*. God that sucks...)

>> Hmm. Skiing? Rock climbing? SALSA?? Hahaha!
> 
> Exactly.  And photography?  Sound and music production/recording, 
> PLAYING THE ORGAN!

OMG YES, PIPE ORGANS FTW! HOW CAN THEY NOT HIRE ME?! :-D

Post a reply to this message