 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 24.08.2012 19:59, schrieb nemesis:
> Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>>>> /Clearly/ I don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of
>>>> getting this job.
>>>
>>> Holy hell... I think they might actually hire me! o_O
>>
>> I just got a letter today.
>>
>> Apparently I am not good enough. (!)
>>
>> At this point, I'm stunned. I seriously can't imagine what more I could
>> have done...
>>
>> Oh well, I guess I'm back to being bereft of hope.
>
> you need a tattoo and a nose ring
Or instead of a tattoo, get a branding along with the nose ring; that
way, you can still make a living as a piece of cattle if all else
fails... >_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-8-2012 9:43, Invisible wrote:
>>> Well, they seemed convinced of my technical capabilities. If anything,
>>> they seemed more worried that I'd get bored and leave in five minutes
>>> flat.
>>
>> If they need an informed opinion about that, they can ask here. We can
>> all testify that you will never leave your job, no matter how boring and
>> underpaid.
>
> Oh, I think they're already convinced of that. 10 years working for one
> company will do that... ;-)
No, I am working now for 23 years in this hospital. People will
correctly assume it is a interesting job with daily new developments and
a great assortment of fantastic colleagues.
They will assume the same from you, unless you have explicitly told them
otherwise. (Which would be extremely foolish, so I wouldn't be surprised
if you did ;) )
--
Women are the canaries of science. When they are underrepresented
it is a strong indication that non-scientific factors play a role
and the concentration of incorruptible scientists is also too low
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 24-8-2012 9:43, Invisible wrote:
> >>> Well, they seemed convinced of my technical capabilities. If anything,
> >>> they seemed more worried that I'd get bored and leave in five minutes
> >>> flat.
> >>
> >> If they need an informed opinion about that, they can ask here. We can
> >> all testify that you will never leave your job, no matter how boring and
> >> underpaid.
> >
> > Oh, I think they're already convinced of that. 10 years working for one
> > company will do that... ;-)
>
> No, I am working now for 23 years in this hospital. People will
> correctly assume it is a interesting job with daily new developments and
> a great assortment of fantastic colleagues.
are you telling me it is not as in "Scrubs"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 17:29:28 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>> /Clearly/ I don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting this
>>> job.
>>
>> Holy hell... I think they might actually hire me! o_O
>
> I just got a letter today.
>
> Apparently I am not good enough. (!)
>
> At this point, I'm stunned. I seriously can't imagine what more I could
> have done...
>
> Oh well, I guess I'm back to being bereft of hope.
Dust your pants off and move on to the next one. Interviewing isn't
about the jobs you don't get, it's about the one you eventually *do* get.
But I know exactly how you feel - I told you about the company in Oregon
that I flew out to interview with, and even after the interview (but
before meeting up with the HR person and the hiring manager), I thought
things went very well. I was quite stunned as well. My conculsion:
They weren't the right company for me, and if they had offered something,
I probably wouldn't have been happy there.
Why did I come to this conclusion? Because I felt I did everything right
and presented what they had specifically asked for. So, if I did things
the way I would've done them as an employee, they'd have not been happy
with the results, AND I might've relocated for a job that wasn't going to
last long because of the working conditions.
So in my case (and as yours) - it's their loss.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 20:01:24 +0200, clipka wrote:
> You may well have been good enough for the job. Possibly there was just
> someone a bit better this time.
That's also a possibility. Another position I'd applied for I was
considered a very strong candidate, but they found someone who was just
as strong a writer *and* who had worked with the software before (I
hadn't - but now I have, a little bit).
It happens.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
> Apparently I am not good enough. (!)
>
> At this point, I'm stunned. I seriously can't imagine what more I could
> have done...
>
I repeat my earlier words:
"If you don't get the job, it doesn't mean you failed nor you are
hopeless - it *just* means they liked someone more than you."
So keep on going, eventually you'll catch the firm that you want and
that wants you.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
One thing I detest about job interviews is that you have to lie even if
you really mean to be honest. You have to lie in order to convey your
true skill properly. (Not that I have extensive experience on job
interviews, but this is from what I have gathered.)
For example, suppose that you are an experienced programmer and have a
good grasp of how imperative/OO languages (either compiled or scripting)
work, and have extensive experience on some languages, but only a very
modest understanding of PHP in particular: You know the basics, you have
perhaps written a hundred of lines of it in total, but you know how it
works and what it offers. Most importantly, if you had to, you could
quickly learn to use it proficiently and competently.
However, job interviews don't generally ask you that. Instead, they ask
you how much you have programmed in PHP.
You have two choices: Tell the truth, or "stretch it a bit".
If you tell them that you have only minimal experience of PHP in particular,
they will probably mark you as not a very good candidate for a PHP
programming job. Your assurances that you can learn the language quickly
and that's not just BS will probably not help much.
The other possibility is to outright lie: You can claim that you have
programmed in PHP quite a lot.
In a sense you are not "lying" per se. Rather, you are answering the
question that they *really* want to ask, rather than the question they
*think* they want to ask. What they really want to know is how easily
you could start programming in PHP, not how much you have programmed
with it in the past.
However, in order to convey your true expertise you have to lie. The bad
thing about this is that you can get caught redhanded. If they start asking
some minutia about PHP you might not know the answers on the spot, and you
will end up looking like an opportunistic liar.
They might well end up hiring someone who has programmed more in PHP (or
at least claims to be) but who's not very good at it.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-8-2012 23:38, nemesis wrote:
> andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> On 24-8-2012 9:43, Invisible wrote:
>>>>> Well, they seemed convinced of my technical capabilities. If anything,
>>>>> they seemed more worried that I'd get bored and leave in five minutes
>>>>> flat.
>>>>
>>>> If they need an informed opinion about that, they can ask here. We can
>>>> all testify that you will never leave your job, no matter how boring and
>>>> underpaid.
>>>
>>> Oh, I think they're already convinced of that. 10 years working for one
>>> company will do that... ;-)
>>
>> No, I am working now for 23 years in this hospital. People will
>> correctly assume it is a interesting job with daily new developments and
>> a great assortment of fantastic colleagues.
>
> are you telling me it is not as in "Scrubs"?
What is "Scrubs"?
GIYF
probably not. I am doing research. IME there is even in the hospital not
enough going on to write a drama series about. There is a lot you could
make interesting television out of, but that won't sell because it is
too scary, and I am not talking blood here. ;)
--
Women are the canaries of science. When they are underrepresented
it is a strong indication that non-scientific factors play a role
and the concentration of incorruptible scientists is also too low
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/08/2012 08:18 AM, Warp wrote:
> They might well end up hiring someone who has programmed more in PHP (or
> at least claims to be) but who's not very good at it.
This is what I hate about IT jobs in particular.
If I wanted to hire a carpenter to build me a decorative oak chest, I
might grab a bunch of carpenters and ask each of them if they've ever
built decorative furniture before, or perhaps whether they've ever built
a chest before.
If an IT manager did it, he would grab a bunch of carpenters and say
"have you ever built anything out of oak before?"
One guy might be a master carpenter who's spent 30 years building
high-end decorative furniture from just about every wood you can name,
BUT NOT OAK. Another guy might be some rookie who barely knows what he's
doing, has only ever put up shelves or fitted window frames, knows
NOTHING about making furniture, never mind DECORATIVE furniture
(slapping some sheets of wood together is completely different to
curving a beautiful masterpiece), but the guy DID once nail some sheets
of oak together.
Obviously, I would hire the first guy, because he has the skills that
matter. But the IT manager? He's a ****ing moron, so he would hire the
second guy. Just because the second guy has some superficial attribute
which is nearly completely unimportant.
Likewise, when an IT manager wants to hire a C# programmer, the first
thing they do is throw away all the CVs that don't say C# on them somewhere.
Now, to be fair, there are people who go to college or whatever, learn
Java, do the minimum amount of work to get their shiny qualification,
and then STOP LEARNING. They then spend the next 20 years writing Java
from 9 to 5. And when they go home, they stop thinking about
programming. They never make any attempt to learn anything new. And if,
for example, Java were to suddenly vanish, these people would have to
spend years painfully "retraining" (by which I mean learning to program
from scratch all over again).
You do NOT want to hire one of these people for a C# role. And by
filtering out CVs that don't say C# on them, you achieve that.
But then you come to somebody like me. My CV has, like, a dozen
programming languages on it. But it doesn't say C#. And, indeed, I have
never written any C# at all. But give me a few months, and I could
/learn/ it. Quite easily, I imagine. I don't know C#, but I have
something vastly more important to offer: I'm a skilled programmer. Not
some drone who learned to copy the examples from a lecture handout with
a few minor tweaks.
But, because my CV does not say C# on it, I would never even be
/interviewed/ for such a job. Which sucks, frankly.
Having just said all that, the interview I went to on Wednesday was
refreshing in that the interviewers had actually studied my CV, and it
was perfectly clear to them that I had the technical aptitude for what
they wanted. They never once questioned my technical skills. Their only
questions were about other things - how well I would work in a team, etc.
The interview went really well; I was able to tell them all about
LogicBox, and in a handful of sentences make them understand what it
does and why that's interesting. I think I impressed them with my
descriptive skills.
And yet... I still don't have a job. And from the postdate on the
letter, it took only an hour or two for them to decide. Apparently I was
that bad. (The letter says something about it being a "difficult
decision" due to the "extremely high calibre of the applicants". But
they probably say that to everybody.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24/08/2012 5:29 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
> I just got a letter today.
>
> Apparently I am not good enough. (!)
>
> At this point, I'm stunned. I seriously can't imagine what more I could
> have done...
>
> Oh well, I guess I'm back to being bereft of hope.
I commiserate but that is life. It is their loss as well.
The thing to do is not to brood about it and go for the next one.
> And yet... I still don't have a job. And from the postdate on the
> letter, it took only an hour or two for them to decide. Apparently I
> was that bad.
No, no, no. They just thought that someone else fitted better, that is all.
> (The letter says something about it being a "difficult
> decision" due to the "extremely high calibre of the applicants". But
> they probably say that to everybody.)
No, not true. Although it is a polite lie it is not always the case.
You came away from the interview feeling that you were in the running so
you probably were. It is just unfortunate (for you) that someone else
got the job. It may have been something trivial such as he lived two
miles away.
When I was working at Motorola my boss told me that he wasn't going to
hire someone because he had a copy of the daily mail in his pocket. Work
that one out. o_O
Anyway don't despair and keep trying.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
