Re: job screening question

[Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>]

On 06/07/2012 23:25, valdis.kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
> The Friday afternoon cynic in me says it's because it's a move with positive
> paybacks.  There's 3 basic possibilities:
>
> 1) You send the puffed resume to a company with clue, it gets recognized
> as puffed, and you don't get the job.  Zero loss, you weren't going to get
> that job anyhow.
>
> 2) You send a boring unpuffed resume to a company sans clue.  They recognize it
> as boring because there's only 3 buzzwords on 2 pages, and you don't get the
> job.  Loss.
>
> 3) You send a puffed resume, and the guy doing the hiring doesn't know what
> the 3-packet mating call of the Internet is *either*.  Win.

or:

4) you get caught out in the interview as being puffed up, but the company
hires you anyway despite strongly worded objections from the interviewer,
causing the interviewer's eyes to spin in their sockets at the inanity of
the decision.  You then spend your entire employment at the company proving
your ineptitude beyond all possible doubt.

I think this is a win, is it?

Nick