XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science   
   From: dtravel@sonic.net   
      
   On 1/24/2014 10:32 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   > In article <52e34a9d$0$52778$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, Dimensional   
   > Traveler  wrote:   
   >> On 1/24/2014 5:17 PM, J. Clarke wrote:   
   >>> In article , robban@clubtelco.com   
   >>> says...   
   >>>> On 25/01/2014 7:21 am, John F. Eldredge wrote:   
   >>>>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 19:10:39 +1300, Your Name wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Yep, I've done and be in numerous surveys too, and they're all   
   >>>>>> completely worthless due to many varying reasons, mostly thanks to the   
   >>>>>> idiotic and misleading way the "results" are reported.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> My pet peeve with surveys is that the correct answer to a question is   
   >>>>> often "none of the above", yet very few surveys allow this as a choice.   
   >>>>> Online surveys, in particular, usually won't let you save the results   
   >>>>> until you have chosen one of the answers the survey-writer supplied.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Very true. I do a lot of online surveys, and in the box most of them   
   >>>> provide for comments, I find myself writing time and time again "In   
   >>>> Question X, you forced me to lie because...".   
   >>>   
   >>> It's not just surveys.  I was helping somebody fill out an employment   
   >>> application for a major hotel chain the other day and at one point it   
   >>> has a section on previous employment and for each one it wants "reason   
   >>> for leaving", with the choices being "Terminated, Promoted, Resigned,   
   >>> Laid Off".  There's no option for "Still employed at this job" and it   
   >>> won't submit the application until you pick one of the four.   
   >>>   
   >>> In the previous section, dates of employment, there's an option "to   
   >>> present" that one would expect to disable the "reason for leaving"   
   >>> requirement, but it doesn't.   
   >>   
   >> And why would a company want to hire someone who has already proven they   
   >> are disloyal enough to look for another job while they already have one?   
   >>    (Keep in mind that the person tossing out applications is probably   
   >> thinking "why would we hire anyone so bad they don't already have a job?".)   
   >   
   > That sounds similar to the silliness where no company will hire you   
   > because you don't have experience, and you can't get experience because   
   > no company will hire you.  :-(   
   >   
   My "favorite" is the job posting I saw that wanted someone with a   
   doctorate in computer science and a minimum of five years post   
   collegiate experience with a programming language that had only existed   
   for three years.   
      
   --   
   The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,   
   hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with   
   methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate   
   wouldn't tolerate.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)