
Success & Motivation – A Great Letter Dissed - Anon84
http://blogmaverick.com/2009/08/28/success-motivation-a-great-letter-dissed/
======
alex_c
_I’ve received a few other applicants from newspaper people, all of whom
swallowed their pride like every other job candidate._

This comment by the prospective employer almost single-handedly redeemed the
applicant in my eyes. These two deserve each other.

------
mikeryan
I'm siding with Mark on this, quite frankly the author did exactly what he
meant to do. Cut through the crap and found out this wasn't the right job for
him.

Except this line (and maybe the one after it) we're unnecessary. (Sell your
self don't crap on others already doing the job)

"Frankly, if there’s a pr person above the pr specialist, I’m probably
qualified for that job, too."

~~~
tptacek
I agree; everything about his letter was pitch-perfect until he stepped on
that landmine.

I think Mark's right about the letter if you take the same generous
interpretation he did, but the applicant here was more than irreverent, he was
also tone-deaf.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
The alleged thirty-year "journalist" write:

    
    
      > Just for the sheer heck of it,
      > I decided to try a different
      > tact with you.
    

What's a different "tact"? Is it a spelling error, a typing error, or
ignorance?

~~~
tptacek
"Alleged" "journalist"? He's a columnist at the KC Star. Do the damn Google
search before you post an elaborate critique of people's spelling and grammar.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
I know who he is, I did the Google search to try to reconcile the grammar and
spelling mistakes that littered the writings being quoted. I found it hard to
believe. To explain clearly why I used the phrasing I did, I will need to tell
you a story. Apologies in advance for its length.

Are you sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin ...

30 months ago we advertised for a programmer. We informed a recruiting agency,
and sent them some homework, stipulating that we didn't want any resumes
without the answers being provided at the same time. They tried once to send a
resume without the answers, but we told them very sharply that this was
unacceptable.

A week later we got back a resume that read like a dream. So much so that we
actually checked some of their claims before we even looked at their homework.
And yes, they had been the lead programmer at a major company, they had
produced several pieces of Open Source code that looked competent, without
being outstanding, and they generally looked like professional programmers.

Then we looked at the homework. It was littered with errors, both logical and
syntactic. The design was opaque, and when we took the time to fix the syntax
errors, and largely debug the logical errors, it still didn't do what it was
supposed to do.

What to do? Call for interview and get to the bottom of it? Deep six the whole
thing and move on? Immediately make an offer?

Despite the impressive track record, my team was talking about the "alleged"
programmer, and so the decision made itself. He had too much of a hill to
climb to gain their respect. No interview, no hire.

Perhaps the problem here is simply the way I expressed myself. Perhaps I
unwittingly used a code phrase from my own experience that isn't known or
shared by others here, and hence was misunderstood. I'd still expect a well-
known, well-renowned professional journalist of long standing to make fewer
errors than I found, but perhaps I just expect too much.

But then again, if he really did want that job, shouldn't he have taken the
time to get things right?

