 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/1/2010 9:44 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:07:32 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>
>> I guess most managers just don't make a habit of telling everybody how
>> much more money they earn than you do...
>
> At least here in the US, salary information is considered confidential
> and isn't supposed to be discussed with anyone other than your boss, HR,
> and payroll.
>
> Jim
The rule ostensibly being to prevent people griping to the boss about
someone else getting a raise. In reality, one suspects its so that the
person working 25 hours a week at $7.25 an hour, and taking food stamps,
doesn't found out that the guy two levels over him works 40 hours at $20
an hour, and the guy at the very top probably makes the equivalent of
$500 an hour, plus gets million dollar bonuses every year, even while
his incompetence just erased your job and that of 2,000 other people
that where in your same situation.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:23:41 +0100, andrel wrote:
> Because I know he lives in Milton Keynes, I doubt if that counts as a
> real city.
Population is about 228,000 people. I think that counts; it may not be
Manhattan, but it is a reasonably heavily populated area.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:41:16 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> The rule ostensibly being to prevent people griping to the boss about
> someone else getting a raise.
Well, yeah, and some people get really touchy about it. I worked with a
guy several years ago who found out the department's administrative
assistant made more than he did; he asked me how I felt about it (never
mind the fact that I probably made more than both of them anyways, but if
I didn't, I really didn't care), and I said "good for her!" - which
caught him quite off-guard.
I don't see salaries as a competition; never have. There's a difference,
though, between being paid competitively and being paid unfairly, so I
look to the industry averages for a point of comparison, never my co-
workers (as if I could anyways).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> He's asking what city you're in.
>
> Because I know he lives in Milton Keynes, I doubt if that counts as a
> real city.
WTF?
It's a major urban center. Of *course* it counts as a city!
(It even has its own "cathedral" - although IMHO it's not really worthy
of the title.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You know, I've never heard anyone work so hard to justify staying
> miserable.
You haven't met my mother, have you?
>> Currently my employer loses around four million USD per year.
>
> Then it's definitely time to find a new job, wouldn't you say?
At what point have I ever suggested that now is not, in fact, the time
to find a new job? :-P
>> Right. Well then I guess it's just that everybody I've met happens to
>> be fairly poor then.
>
> If you rarely leave MK then that's probably true, yes.
You're right. I should go live in London, where everybody is still poor,
but everything costs 80x as much. :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Most of the "graduate jobs" I can find say something like £18,000 or
>> maybe even £20,000 if you have a 1st degree [which I don't].
>
> You're looking in the wrong place.
I had concluded that this was probably the case, yes. (But this just
raises the question of "where should I look then?")
> I made something like $35k *after*
> taxes upon graduating from college, at a company no better off than
> yours. In 1985. And this wasn't in a big bustling city either.
Don't wages vary depending on which country you work in though?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You're looking in the wrong place. I made something like $35k *after*
> taxes upon graduating from college, at a company no better off than yours.
> In 1985. And this wasn't in a big bustling city either.
You're on the other side of the world, you can't really compare. For
example Andrew gets free healthcare and probably a lot more paid vacation
than you did there, not to mention the cost of living, taxes etc. Even
between Germany and UK it is very different (eg Engineers get paid about 50%
more in Germany).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Even between Germany and UK it is very different (eg Engineers get
> paid about 50% more in Germany).
Is this why Germany is legendary for having some of the best engineering
in the world?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Even between Germany and UK it is very different (eg Engineers get paid
>> about 50% more in Germany).
>
> Is this why Germany is legendary for having some of the best engineering
> in the world?
I don't think so, most Germans don't realise that they are getting paid more
than people in the UK (and vice-versa I would imagine). I think it's more
to do with culture here, in that it seems (with my very limited sample
size!) that more people are willing to pay for things to be done properly,
and won't choose a cheaper alternative that is of lower quality. This
results in some products simply not being available because there is no
demand for them, and probably contributes to the way things are designed in
the first place.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> I think
> it's more to do with culture here, in that it seems (with my very
> limited sample size!) that more people are willing to pay for things to
> be done properly, and won't choose a cheaper alternative that is of
> lower quality. This results in some products simply not being available
> because there is no demand for them, and probably contributes to the way
> things are designed in the first place.
Ah, I see.
Most people I've met see only the price tag. Yes it's nice to have a
better product, but look at the price tag...
I think I mentioned at some point the horrifyingly low levels of
customer service that most companies provide. Most people wouldn't
switch to another provider to get better service, only to get a lower
price. Three guesses where that lower price comes from.
Personally, I'm one of those people who doesn't mind paying more money
if I actually get a better product. Then again, I shop at John Lewis, so
apparently I'm crazy.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:4b64af7c@news.povray.org...
>
> Well.. that one's more debatable. "I'm used to large
infrastructure" is
I wouldn't say "used to," it's slang. I would say,
"accustomed to."
~db
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"DungBeatle" <dun### [at] moscowcom> wrote in message
news:4b6860ab$1@news.povray.org...
> "Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
> news:4b64af7c@news.povray.org...
> >
> > Well.. that one's more debatable. "I'm used to large
> infrastructure" is
>
> I wouldn't say "used to," it's slang. I would say,
> "accustomed to."
>
> ~db
And of course, the proper way is, "to which I am
accustomed."
But that might sound snobbish...
~db
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
DungBeatle wrote:
> I wouldn't say "used to," it's slang. I would say,
> "accustomed to."
Huh. I wouldn't have said that. "Accustomed" is more formal, but "used to"
is just fine I think. Sometimes one can go too far in being formal, to the
point where one starts saying "utilize" instead of "use" even when it means
the wrong thing, etc.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
DungBeatle wrote:
> And of course, the proper way is, "to which I am
> accustomed."
Not really. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Don't wages vary depending on which country you work in though?
Yes, but the euro isn't *that* different from the dollar.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Andrew gets free healthcare and probably a lot more paid
> vacation than you did there, not to mention the cost of living, taxes
Sure. But to be paid 20 years later (after several years of experience) at a
wholesale rate lower than I was taking home?
(Plus, we do have health care here. It's just not through the government.)
And I suspect his taxes are higher than mine were, too. I.e., many of those
considerations are in the wrong direction. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> POSIX doesn't define only system calls.
But once you're posix-compliant enough to compile all the utilities, what
else is there? I.e., if all my APIs are posix compliant and all my #include
files are posix-compliant, what am I missing?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4b686df2@news.povray.org...
> DungBeatle wrote:
> > I wouldn't say "used to," it's slang. I would say,
> > "accustomed to."
>
> Huh. I wouldn't have said that. "Accustomed" is more
formal, but "used to"
> is just fine I think. Sometimes one can go too far in
being formal, to the
> point where one starts saying "utilize" instead of "use"
even when it means
> the wrong thing, etc.
21 years at a university, just habits... :)
~db
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
DungBeatle wrote:
> 21 years at a university, just habits... :)
Sure. As I said, it's much more formal. That doesn't mean "used to" is
slang. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
I get "focus follows gaze"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2-2-2010 10:10, Invisible wrote:
>>> He's asking what city you're in.
>>
>> Because I know he lives in Milton Keynes, I doubt if that counts as a
>> real city.
>
> WTF?
>
> It's a major urban center. Of *course* it counts as a city!
>
> (It even has its own "cathedral" - although IMHO it's not really worthy
> of the title.)
Perhaps city is used in a slightly different meaning in English than
here. Actually I would be surprised if we meant the same thing. For me a
city needs at least an identifiable center with an active cultural scene
and a general feeling of being more part of the world than of the county
it happens to be in.
Where I live has a name that suggest that it is a city , 'Zaanstad'
where 'stad' means city (and 'Zaan' is the name of our river). Everybody
understands that that is a joke or at best something we would wish to
be, though perhaps there are a few people paid to try to suggest to the
world at large that we are a real city. This is simply a collection of
small towns and villages.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:15:42 +0100, andrel wrote:
> Perhaps city is used in a slightly different meaning in English than
> here.
It does have different meanings in English - but in general, a city is
nothing more than a population centre with a name.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Strike a light - I enquired about a vacancy on the Haskell mailing list,
and actually got a response for the first time ever! o_O
Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:19:55 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
> programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
Could be just the thing you were looking for. Good luck!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Sure. But to be paid 20 years later (after several years of experience) at
> a wholesale rate lower than I was taking home?
A new graduate in the UK will be getting 20-30K pounds, that equates to
$25-$35k take home pay.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
>> programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
>
> Could be just the thing you were looking for. Good luck!
Heh, yeah. It probably won't be, but I might get some useful information
out of it...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:11:22 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>> Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
>>> programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
>>
>> Could be just the thing you were looking for. Good luck!
>
> Heh, yeah. It probably won't be, but I might get some useful information
> out of it...
Exactly - when applying for jobs, if it doesn't work out, it doesn't work
out - but you get some experience with the application (and potentially
the interview) process, and that's always good to have.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Sure. But to be paid 20 years later (after several years of
>> experience) at a wholesale rate lower than I was taking home?
>
> A new graduate in the UK will be getting 20-30K pounds, that equates to
> $25-$35k take home pay.
Now where on earth do you find data like that?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:33:59 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> scott wrote:
>>> Sure. But to be paid 20 years later (after several years of
>>> experience) at a wholesale rate lower than I was taking home?
>>
>> A new graduate in the UK will be getting 20-30K pounds, that equates to
>> $25-$35k take home pay.
>
> Now where on earth do you find data like that?
http://tinyurl.com/yl8h5ys perhaps?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Now where on earth do you find data like that?
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yl8h5ys perhaps?
I can barely believe that that actually works...
Anyway, I'd expect the figures to vary by subject area and region. (The
Prospects survey apparently covers mainly jobs in London, and everything
in London is 8x more expensive, so I guess people get paid more.)
Whatever, it's no secret that I'm underpaid.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:53:30 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I can barely believe that that actually works...
And yet here we are. :-)
> Anyway, I'd expect the figures to vary by subject area and region. (The
> Prospects survey apparently covers mainly jobs in London, and everything
> in London is 8x more expensive, so I guess people get paid more.)
Cost of living is certainly a factor - I make pretty good money in Utah,
but I could barely live on my salary in San Francisco (and own a house).
> Whatever, it's no secret that I'm underpaid.
True - but as we've said before, when you look for a new job, don't use
your current pay as an assumed base, especially when considering where
you can afford to live. Your current salary has no bearing on that -
it's what you'll make in the new job that has the most bearing on what
you'll be able to afford.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Strike a light - I enquired about a vacancy on the Haskell mailing list,
> and actually got a response for the first time ever! o_O
>
> Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
> programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
>
If you are looking for a reference...
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> If you are looking for a reference...
...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>
>> If you are looking for a reference...
>
> ....
>
I'll give you one, reference that is.
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I'll give you one
O_O
> reference that is.
Oh, right.
Hokey, that makes 2 references now...
(Otherwise it would have made 2 offers from men, which would be a Bad
Thing.)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> I'll give you one
>
> O_O
>
>> reference that is.
>
> Oh, right.
>
> Hokey, that makes 2 references now...
>
> (Otherwise it would have made 2 offers from men, which would be a Bad
> Thing.)
>
Don't knock it unless you've tried it ;)
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I keep trying to find that one episode of QC where Raven plans to
increase business using sex... but since all the strips have titles
which are part of the punchline rather than being descriptive, and
Google can't read image text, it's proving nearly impossible to find. :-(
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3-2-2010 21:29, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:53:30 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Whatever, it's no secret that I'm underpaid.
>
> True - but as we've said before, when you look for a new job, don't use
> your current pay as an assumed base, especially when considering where
> you can afford to live. Your current salary has no bearing on that -
> it's what you'll make in the new job that has the most bearing on what
> you'll be able to afford.
If you put it that way it seems to make sense. No wonder that we have
repeatedly tried to get it into his thick head. I wonder why that didn't
work...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:36:19 +0100, andrel wrote:
> If you put it that way it seems to make sense.
If I'm starting to make sense, be afraid....be very afraid. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:48:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> I'll give you one
>>
>> O_O
>>
>>> reference that is.
>>
>> Oh, right.
>>
>> Hokey, that makes 2 references now...
>>
>> (Otherwise it would have made 2 offers from men, which would be a Bad
>> Thing.)
>>
>>
> Don't knock it unless you've tried it ;)
LOL
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:36:19 +0100, andrel wrote:
>
>> If you put it that way it seems to make sense.
>
> If I'm starting to make sense, be afraid....be very afraid. ;-)
>
LOL
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:48:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> I'll give you one
>>> O_O
>>>
>>>> reference that is.
>>> Oh, right.
>>>
>>> Hokey, that makes 2 references now...
>>>
>>> (Otherwise it would have made 2 offers from men, which would be a Bad
>>> Thing.)
>>>
>>>
>> Don't knock it unless you've tried it ;)
>
> LOL
The old ones are the best ones :-P
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Strike a light - I enquired about a vacancy on the Haskell mailing list,
> and actually got a response for the first time ever! o_O
>
> Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
> programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
So I *finally* sent them my CV. Apparently they're now considering it.
Also: Cambridge is actually *further away* than Coventry. Idiot. (I was
thinking of Oxford...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:50:48 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Strike a light - I enquired about a vacancy on the Haskell mailing
>> list, and actually got a response for the first time ever! o_O
>>
>> Currently in discussions with a friendly guy who's looking to hire a
>> programmer. We'll see if this leads anywhere...
>
> So I *finally* sent them my CV. Apparently they're now considering it.
Good!
> Also: Cambridge is actually *further away* than Coventry. Idiot. (I was
> thinking of Oxford...)
Well, see what the pay looks like; if it's a reasonable wage, look at
what the cost of living is around Cambridge; see if they can help you
with housing. It never hurts to ask.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> So I *finally* sent them my CV. Apparently they're now considering it.
>
> Good!
Very quiet here...
>> Also: Cambridge is actually *further away* than Coventry. Idiot. (I was
>> thinking of Oxford...)
>
> Well, see what the pay looks like; if it's a reasonable wage, look at
> what the cost of living is around Cambridge; see if they can help you
> with housing. It never hurts to ask.
Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first! ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:16:54 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> So I *finally* sent them my CV. Apparently they're now considering it.
>>
>> Good!
>
> Very quiet here...
>
>>> Also: Cambridge is actually *further away* than Coventry. Idiot. (I
>>> was thinking of Oxford...)
>>
>> Well, see what the pay looks like; if it's a reasonable wage, look at
>> what the cost of living is around Cambridge; see if they can help you
>> with housing. It never hurts to ask.
>
> Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first! ;-)
That would also be a good step, sure - I'm just saying that you shouldn't
discount them because of where they are. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first! ;-)
>
> That would also be a good step, sure - I'm just saying that you shouldn't
> discount them because of where they are. :-)
I applied, didn't I? ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:49:47 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first! ;-)
>>
>> That would also be a good step, sure - I'm just saying that you
>> shouldn't discount them because of where they are. :-)
>
> I applied, didn't I? ;-)
Indeed you did - and that's definitely a step in the right direction. :-)
I just didn't want you to be discouraged now that you've realised they're
not where you thought they were. :)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>> Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first! ;-)
>>> That would also be a good step, sure - I'm just saying that you
>>> shouldn't discount them because of where they are. :-)
>> I applied, didn't I? ;-)
>
> Indeed you did - and that's definitely a step in the right direction. :-)
>
> I just didn't want you to be discouraged now that you've realised they're
> not where you thought they were. :)
Meh. I applied for a place in Glasgow. :-P I'm not quite as hung-up on
location as everybody thinks.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15-2-2010 10:06, Invisible wrote:
>>>>> Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first! ;-)
>>>> That would also be a good step, sure - I'm just saying that you
>>>> shouldn't discount them because of where they are. :-)
>>> I applied, didn't I? ;-)
>>
>> Indeed you did - and that's definitely a step in the right direction. :-)
>>
>> I just didn't want you to be discouraged now that you've realised
>> they're not where you thought they were. :)
>
> Meh. I applied for a place in Glasgow. :-P I'm not quite as hung-up on
> location as everybody thinks.
Why would we think that? ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 09:06:50 +0000, Invisible wrote:
>>>>> Well, sure, let's just see if they even ask to interview me first!
>>>>> ;-)
>>>> That would also be a good step, sure - I'm just saying that you
>>>> shouldn't discount them because of where they are. :-)
>>> I applied, didn't I? ;-)
>>
>> Indeed you did - and that's definitely a step in the right direction.
>> :-)
>>
>> I just didn't want you to be discouraged now that you've realised
>> they're not where you thought they were. :)
>
> Meh. I applied for a place in Glasgow. :-P I'm not quite as hung-up on
> location as everybody thinks.
This is the first evidence to the contrary that has been presented. That
being the case, good for you!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
