• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

The more we know the more we are disappointed

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The more we know the more we are disappointed

    The more we are informed about politics, the more sleaze and corruption we see.

    The more we know about a holiday resort, the less likely we are to book.

    Employers do more and more checks on people and find more and more CV lies or false references. Some even include psychological tests in their HR procedures.

    Is it better, sometimes, to know a little bit less and take what you see on face value?

    I'm not suggesting medical staff shouldn't be checked for having the relevant qualifications, or even that my qualifications shouldn't be checked. But if you dig deep enough, delve into everyone's past enough, and venture into the darkest recesses of someone's mind you'll probably find something unpleasant enough to turn you off them.

    The panel's opinions please.
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

    #2
    On some things, I'd want to know as much as poss, i.e. if my son was involved.

    But in other terms, I agree - particularly where people / relationships are concerned.
    Practically perfect in every way....there's a time and (more importantly) a place for malarkey.
    +5 Xeno Cool Points

    Comment


      #3
      I disagree - We are only told about the negatives and so that's all we see at first glance.

      How many people actually post positive reviews of things (eg holidays)?

      Most reviews are from a minority of people who have had a bad experience and are out for revenge IMHO.

      Comment


        #4
        Like a lot of subjects, it was done in Science Fiction of the Golden Age. Someone (Damon Knight?) had a story about 2 secret telepaths, a man and a woman. Overjoyed to find they were not alone in the world, they tried to get together, but it couldn't work because they couldn't face knowing everything about each other.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Pondlife View Post
          I disagree - We are only told about the negatives and so that's all we see at first glance.

          How many people actually post positive reviews of things (eg holidays)?

          Most reviews are from a minority of people who have had a bad experience and are out for revenge IMHO.
          That's the well-known "whingers post more" effect. You just have to allow for it when you read reviews.

          Comment


            #6
            I recently went for an interview for a 60 day contract, I flew through the technical stuff but was flummoxed when the HR man started asking fluffy questions that would only really be relevant to a permanent position.

            Its not certain yet but if I have failed it will be because of some bulltulip question about future career goals rather than subnetting or TCP/IP.

            So yes, they're probably missing out on some good skills which they originally wanted by hiring good bulltulipers.
            Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave Johnson

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Pondlife View Post
              How many people actually post positive reviews of things (eg holidays)?
              That's why i never read 'user submitted reviews' of hotels etc - you only ever get the minority of people who had a bad experience - you have no measure of the ratio of these to satisfied customers.
              Cooking doesn't get tougher than this.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by MaryPoppins View Post
                On some things, I'd want to know as much as poss, i.e. if my son was involved.

                But in other terms, I agree - particularly where people / relationships are concerned.
                Ah, now this brings up an interesting question. Did you know that if a 16 year old boy has sex with his 15 year old girlfriend, or the other way around, or indeed a 17 year old (previously a 20 year old) has a homosexual relationship, that person can end up on a sex offender’s register. Would you consider that a reason, some years later, to prevent that person working as a teacher with your child? Probably not. But that’s the reality of storing lots of information and then using it injudiciously. Would you care if your family doctor had been convicted for a pub fight when he was a student but had behaved just fine ever since?
                And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by gingerjedi View Post
                  I recently went for an interview for a 60 day contract, I flew through the technical stuff but was flummoxed when the HR man started asking fluffy questions that would only really be relevant to a permanent position.
                  Should have told them so. My career aspirations are none of ClientCos business.
                  Cooking doesn't get tougher than this.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by TheBigYinJames View Post
                    Should have told them so. My career aspirations are none of ClientCos business.
                    I know that but you stand little chance of landing the gig if you tell the interviewer he's asking the wrong questions, this stems from them being too picky and probing too deeply when all they really want is a fixer who will be in and out with the minimum of fuss.
                    Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave Johnson

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X