Does a Lame E-Mail Address Really Matter?

theodp writes "Over at the Chicago Tribune, freelance writer Nancy Anderson makes an embarrassing confession. It's 2010 and she still has an AOL e-mail address. 'You've got to get rid of that AOL address,' her publicist sister told her five years ago. 'It's bad for your image.' Image, shmimage, Anderson thought. 'If I do good work,' she asks, 'does my e-mail address really matter?' Good question. Would an AOL e-mail address — or another 'toxic' e-mail address — influence your decision to hire someone?"

Comments

yes

[Anonymous Coward]

yes.

Re:yes

[iamapizza]

I agree.

Sincerely
iamapizza@BySendingYouThisEmailIHerebyConfirmYourAwesomeness.com

Re:yes

[Pharmboy]

It is terrible that someone would judge others by something as simple as an email address. Yet we all do it. *@aol.com instantly kicks in my "dumbass...." reflex, and I'm sure it does for most other nerds. Worse yet, can you image applying for an IT job with an aol email account? Right or wrong, it would be looked down on.

Re:yes

[MistrBlank]

Well where I work, we did in fact throw a number of resumes out the window specifically because of hotmail and AOL email addresses.

But then again, I work in IT, those people SHOULD know better.

Re:yes

[jimbolauski]

Probably not as much as if you had your resume hosted on geocities.

Re:yes

[Moryath]

I see applications from people all the time that send in resumes with stupid email addresses. Right or wrong, we judge on this.

Commonsense (and most recruiters or professional resume polishers) will tell you: Get a nice, professional-looking email address. Your.Name@SomeBusiness.com can work (though be careful of that, since if you leave your job it may go away). Your.Name at somewhere neutral (yahoo, hotmail, gmail, etc) works well. "Spicysluttybarbie@cheapdate.com" isn't going to look professional and unless you're applying for work as a stripper, isn't going to help you.

An AOL email address, today, has you attached to a sinking ship. Right or wrong, people are going to judge by that. And right or wrong, having an AOL address will indicate to people that you aren't very good with technology, which does make it harder for you to convince them you can match the job's skills requirement later.

My advice? Set your AOL address to a redirect, create a nice new, neutral/professional address, and go from there.

Re:yes

[Teufelhunde]

Well where I work, we did in fact throw a number of resumes out the window specifically because of hotmail and AOL email addresses.

But then again, I work in IT, those people SHOULD know better.

But what if they are just using those AOL or hotmail addresses as their personal spam box? Maybe they are old email addresses that they give out to unknown people/companies?

I sure wouldn't be giving someone I don't know my personal email.

Re:yes

[selven]

If you're trying to apply for a new job, is the employer going to care about what company you were associated with beyond trying to figure out why you left/got fired?

Re:yes

[Nimey]

Gah, s/n do/n so/

I'm up early with my kid.

Re:yes

[EyelessFade]

Uhm where you are applying for work? If that's your attitude when you apply for work, they have all reason to throw out your application

Re:yes

[tepples]

Why would you advertise AOL or hotmail, when you have a chance to plug your own site?

Not everybody has 1. the cash for hosting for a site and 2. the time to maintain one.

Re:yes

[Rockoon]

You could look at this from the other direction too.

Suppose the applicant is filtering employers by using an aol address, on the presumption that any MANAGER smart enough to avoid aol addresses is probably too smart to easily sabotage and then replace after getting hired.

Re:yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Your company is over run with dipweasels.

An AOL address is as viable as any other, and they may have good reasons for keeping it that have nothing to do with their profession.

There is not one damned thing wrong with an AOL account. You just want to think you're so much smarter, better or whatever. But you're missing one of the cardinal rules of IT: If the damned thing works, don't mess with it.

Snobs are not fun to work for anyway.

Good for the ones you rejected on such a stupid criteria. They probably found real jobs with real companies with real people.

Re:yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Me too.

Re:yes

[91degrees]

Truly, You have a dizzying intellect.

Re:yes

[HTH NE1]

Me too.

tl;dr

Re:yes

[mcgrew]

Lame addresses:

imalamer@aol.com
wtf@sex.com
dumbass67@dipshits.org
8675309@tmobile.com
urndrarrest@fbi.gov
throwingchairs@microsoft.com
cowboyneal@slashdot.org

Re:yes

[HTH NE1]

I really want an @compuserve.com email address. Retro-cool.

U WANT RETRO, GET BIFF@BIT.NET!

0xB1FF

Re:yes

[IcyNeko]

I agree.

-919192348@compuserve.com

Re:yes

[Nimey]

Your mom does.

Re:yes

[Nerdfest]

If the damned thing works, don't mess with it.

Stopping innovation since the beginning of time. Times change, people change, perceptions change. Email domains are like clothing. You might like showing up for work in a Victorian era outfit, but you're gong to get some strange looks. Try it in an interview and you won't likely get through the door, unless it's a quiet day in need of some entertainment.

Re:yes

[jacksonj04]

Things like @aol.com and @hotmail.com don't bother me, what bothers me is before the @ symbol. joe_middlename_bloggs@ is fine, even from things like Hotmail, but xXxXx_BuBbLe_PrInCeSs_1987_xXxXx@ is going to find its way to my trash folder very, very quickly.

Re:yes

[jacksonj04]

Once upon a time AOL was a nice, neutral email provider.

Re:yes

[L4t3r4lu5]

If you already have an interview, they already want you. Turning up in a cravat and tailed coat is more than likely not going to hurt your chances at employment.

I bet they'd be more impressed with a top hat than a Children of Bodom t-shirt.

Re:yes

[HangingChad]

*@aol.com instantly kicks in my "dumbass...." reflex,

And that was true at one time. But now it's almost like an internet antique. A retro fashion statement more than a declaration of internet arrested development.

Re:yes

[Anonymous Coward]

No

I have an AOL account. My second e-mail account, the first being an msn account that was closed years ago. I use the aol account for things which may result in spam or marketing emails.

I'm a great employee and if the aol.com means you don't think I'll fit in your organization, then you're probably right. But you are confused over who has the problem.

Re:yes

[mantis2009]

Excellent point. The labor market is so tight these days, workers can easily dictate their place of employment based on subtle criteria like email address prejudice.

Re:yes

[Zen-Mind]

Who is to say that an @aol.com < @hotmail.com < @gmail.com? I believe this is just some kind of geek "racism". There are probably very good reasons to have an AOL address and it can even be a good interview question to ask; if your IT staff is based on "coolness" factor of any given technology, your are in for a nice ride.

However, as someone else already posted, the actual account name is much more important IMO as it can give an general idea of the person's personality and attention to his public image; RockCock, BongKing, KegMaster, ... you know you are dealing with someone who's mind never really grew up after their 20th birthday. Not that this is necessarily bad, but not all jobs are fit for the "young at heart".

Re:yes

[Rockoon]

Sometimes people look for new jobs while already employed, and some never stop looking.

Re:yes

[Necrobruiser]

Your resume tells a prospective employer about you. An AOL address on your resume could tell the hiring manager that you are either slow to change or perhaps uncaring about what others think about you. Either way, that doesn't sound like someone you would want working for or with you. An AOL address is not the end of the world, but on a resume where you have a page or two to tell a prospective employer about you, why wouldn't you go out of your way to make a good impression?

Re:yes

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Is the Alyssa Milano naked photo queue?

Me too.

beefy@upenn.edu

Re:yes

[xaxa]

I've got a Yahoo email address. Would you have been do stupidly biased against me?

JoeBloggs@(yahoo|gmail|hotmail).com are all pretty much alike IMO, but steer clear of sexy_pants_87@anything.

If someone doesn't want to pay for their own domain, and doesn't have an address provided by their university (if they went, and if they went recently enough) then there's not much choice.

I use myfirstname@mysurname.uk on my CV (and for most other things). I could also use firstname.surname@alumni.imperial.ac.uk.

Re:yes

[Rastl]

Your resume tells a prospective employer about you. An AOL address on your resume could tell the hiring manager that you are either slow to change or perhaps uncaring about what others think about you

Or it could say that you've had an an e-mail address for a very long time and continue to use it because it's the one everyone knows. Yes, there's an institutional bias against AOL but I can't see where using the account that you've had for years should be any factor in whether or not someone looks at your resume.

I know that one of the new 'job seeking advice rules' is to get a professional address on one of the main mail hosts but someone else said that Hotmail is an address they toss. So maybe another company has a bias against Yahoo. Or Gmail. You can't please everyone so I say just use the account you actually check and go from there.

Then again if your address is IFeelPretty@AOL.com and your name is Frank then maybe, just maybe, you might want to consider getting another address for job seeking. There are some things the hiring manager doesn't need to infer. Really, they don't.

Re:yes

[Anonymous Coward]

What if they are out of a job and all they can afford is free? What if their ISP doesnt have email (some do not you know). Perhaps the only other email they have is the current company they work for and the IT guy there snoops?

Have you actually used things like monster to look for a job? You get THOUSANDS of spams/scams. Aol, hotmail, etc... have excellent spam filtering services.

Yes an @aol.com does look bad. But guess what its just an email account. Hell I still have .edu accounts from 20 years ago...

You may want to re-think your attitude. Like you say But then again, I work in IT, those people SHOULD know better. Apparently you dont.

Re:yes

[rootofevil]

as a hiring manger, if i see an address like the one you outlined there, the first thing that jumps out at me is 'completely unprofessional'. thats a major strike you dont want or need against you, and that you chose to overlook that or (even worse) shove in my face that you dont care is a a huge warning sign that you are going to be a trouble employee should we end up hiring you.

image matters, no matter how much you want it not to.

in this age, when you can have multiple addresses easily from yahoo/gmail/etc, why not just have a second 'professional' address for work related matters? unless youre applying for a job at a strip joint.

Re:yes

[T-Bone-T]

Yes. Email is a cheap expense if it helps you get a job. In fact, GMail doesn't cost a thing.

Re:yes

[TheLink]

On my CVs I use:

<recipient tag>@<tag>.<mydomain>

For example if I'm applying to Google it could be something like:

googlehr@google.mydomain

That way if my CV gets passed around later on, I might have an idea of who did it.

My CV is also typically in html. It looks about the same on most browsers, but depending on the circumstances the reader might see different content. I might also get notification that someone is reading my CV :).

So far I guess I'm lucky that it hasn't stopped me from getting jobs :).

Re:yes

[PopeRatzo]

But then this candidate had no experience but had bought himself a lot of certifications. We would have accepted him for toner changer lackey but his school made him think he was worthy of a $80K a year job.

Newsflash, he just bought the company you work for, and he's outsourcing the IT.

Re:yes

[PopeRatzo]

Are they supposed to get another email service simply to apply for a job?

Absolutely. Especially if you're looking for a job in IT. For less than the cost of a pair of shoes you can get your own domain and email service, and you can get a gmail account for free. When you're looking for a job, you should look as though you have a clue.

Although, you have to be careful, if you get "yourname@me.com" you will look like you have a raging clue.

Re:yes

[tixxit]

Your example is pretty outlandish. my.name@gmail.com or joe.blo@aol.com is a decent looking e-mail. I'd say doe.blo@aol.com is more akin to slacks and a golf shirt, rather than a victorian outfit. super_sexy_stud@aol.com, OTOH, is akin to coming in with an I'm With Stupid t-shirt. That said, stifling innovation? Let's rephrase what the GP said. If something works as its supposed to, then don't fix it and go work on something new and exciting instead! If we spend all our time making minor improvements to tech that is already meeting our requirements, then we CANNOT innovate. Believe it or not, some people don't think the matter of who owns the mail server their e-mail is going to makes a huge difference in their lives.

Re:yes

[plague3106]

Why is gmail better than hotmail or aol?

Re:yes

[plague3106]

Ya, that logic works. That's why we didn't have a push for phone number portability a few years back too. I mean, its just a number, right? No problem to change it whenever.

Re:yes

[WinterSolstice]

As another old Cserve person (11465,1123 - note the comma - later a dot when email became popular) I would say that any compuserve people who stayed post AOL buyout deserve to be singled out ;)

Seriously though - yes. Embarrassing email addresses should not be used professionally. This isn't so much hotmail or msn or aol (provider level, like the article is about) as it is the actual address.

I will *not* consider 'partyd00d420@whatever' for a job. Sorry, just not going to happen.

Re:yes

[clone53421]

Or it could say that you've had an an e-mail address for a very long time and continue to use it because it's the one everyone knows.

You wouldn’t use that logic to keep having your physical mail addressed to the local homeless shelter...

Re:yes

[mantis2009]

Wait, if that many people are in the market for jobs, maybe the labor market isn't as tight as I thought! Oh, no! I might have to take a job even if the employer is prejudiced against my chippendale97@aol.com email address!

Re:yes

[adamdoyle]

you are a genius... I'd hire you just for that

Re:yes

[Anonymous Coward]

As professional as 'rootofevil'?

Re:yes

[MBGMorden]

I must agree with you. Personally I don't care WHAT the domain is on their email. AOL, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc. Doesn't matter as long as it's not obviously unprofessional (bob@naughtyschoolgirls.com would raise some eyebrows). However, your username you have some choice in and if you're going to use it on a resume, it should reflect some sense of professionalism. Choose something that is at least presentable. Use your goofy username for your private stuff.

I mean really, if the most awesome candidate in the world came in with matted hair in a Lynard Skynard t-shirt in old shots and flip-flops, he's not getting the job, no matter how good he is.

Re:yes

[Knitebane]

72072,356 here. Funny how some things just stick in your memory.

Re:yes

[JoeMerchant]

In 2001, the majority of job applications I received started including e-mail addresses, and, surprisingly to me, the majority of those addresses were far less professional than the cover letters and resumes they were on - things like "hotbabe74@aol.com" and "stonerick@hotmail.com". How could these people not think that something like that makes an impression?

I guess the same way that the nerds of the world have always thought that a mustard stain on the collar is no big deal.

The ratio of immature e-mail addresses has dropped over the years, but the clueless still abound. I especially loved the one who gave me a link to his homepage which detailed how he was an ongoing target of the mkultra project, thanks for the heads up man.

Re:yes

[Dark_Matter88]

That is not only closed minded, but self-inhibiting. Some of the best software developers use social networks to get there code out there, commented on and for self-improvement. Slashdot is almost a social website as it is, so this is a bit Hypocritical. Try to embrace all tools at your disposal. All major software companies use this 'social crap' to good effect.

Re:yes

[ae1294]

Is the Alyssa Milano naked photo queue?

LoL, o yes good times...

You damn whippersnapper today just don't understand how good ya got it. In my day there was only two types of porn; ugly ass amateurs, porn magazine scans and screen captures from shitty Alyssa Milano movies. And all where in 256 colors if you where lucky. Ok so sure there were really three types but don't question your elders son. No respect having little bastards..

Re:yes

[jthill]

Why is gmail better than hotmail or aol?

1. Your email is yours, not theirs: they don't insert ads.
2. Your email is yours, not theirs: full ssl'd POP3/IMAP.
3. Their spam filters are second to none.

Re:yes

[ae1294]

You can also use your webspace to inject malware and key-loggers onto potential employers computers so you're never out of the loop on whether you're getting that job!

Re:yes

[Grishnakh]

I wouldn't hire someone with an AOL address, not for any technology job. It just shows that they're not too smart, since they pay extra every month for a useless online service primarily for email when you can get free email addresses from Yahoo or Gmail.

Now, I definitely would NOT exclude someone because they had a Gmail or Yahoo or Hotmail address. That seems rather silly, as those are the largest webmail providers, they're free, they don't go away when you change ISPs or employers, etc. In fact, what alternatives do job-seekers have for email?

1) Company email addresses: this is pretty stupid. Only an idiot would list his current work address when looking for a new job. This would be the first person whose resume I'd throw in the trash (even before the AOL users). Is this employee so inept that he doesn't know how to get an email address that isn't tied to his employer? What does he think is going to happen to this address when he leaves his job (which he's obviously interested in doing)? And what is he doing blatantly using company email for personal purposes? I don't want someone like that around.

2) ISP email addresses: another big sign that someone is not internet-savvy. Are you so clueless that you don't know how to sign up for a Gmail account (which lets you download your mail by POP if you want)? What do you think will happen when you have to change ISPs, such as if you move to another state for a job? Really, having to update your email address with everyone you know or do business with is so 90s. This is exactly why we changed to Gmail, Yahoo mail, etc., so we'd have one address that would always stay the same.

3) Other paid email services: why pay for something you can get for free, especially when Gmail works so well? Unless you own your own domain and have email through that (which actually is a good sign), this just doesn't have any advantage over Gmail et al. And as someone who's had an account with Netidentity.com (now owned by Tucows), it can be a big PITA when their service goes down for days at a time due to their ineptness. Google doesn't have this problem; when Gmail goes down for 45 minutes, it's front-page news.

Re:yes

[nmb3000]

Your email is yours, not theirs

You're saying this about Google!? . The only people that might be worse than Google in terms of data mining and user tracking is the NSA. When somebody sends you an email to Gmail, don't be confused -- Google owns that message. They're just nice enough to let you read it too.

they don't insert ads.

That's not even true. Gmail pages have plenty of text advertisements.

Don't get me wrong, I use and mostly like Gmail, but people wearing such obvious fanboy blinders towards Google's actions and motives drive me nuts.

Re:yes

[AxemRed]

AOL offers free email, just like Hotmail, Yahoo, and others. You don't have to pay money for it.

Also, many people still using an @aol email may have originally had AOL back in the 90's and decided to keep their email address even after they dropped AOL as their ISP. I left AOL in 1999, and they let me keep my email address and AIM screen name... I still have them in fact, although I don't use them much. If I had used my @aol email address extensively though, I would probably still be using it. Why go through the trouble of changing your email address when you already have something that works and is free?

Re:yes

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Interesting that I am modded offtopic. Apparently people remember the "me too" posts, but they don't remember WHAT they were "me too-ing" all about.

For the newbies, the original posts were offers to email Alyssa Milano nude photos to anyone who posted on the thread.

Alyssa Milano was an actress in the late 20th century who was apparently very beautiful, and very young. If she did have any nude photos, they would have been highly sought after by many computer programmers.

The cascades of "me too" comments in response to these nude photo offers became legends, and after AOL connected to Usenet, became sources of sorrow.

Re:yes

[GameboyRMH]

I will *not* consider 'partyd00d420@whatever' for a job. Sorry, just not going to happen.

Really? You're not going to consider someone because of their email address?

I gave a "silly" email address (my username at gmail) to a few companies on my CV. One gave me shit over it, and it was a place so full of bullshit corporate politics that the issue nearly dominated the interview. Another one of those places hired me, and if they regret it, they're doing their best to make me think otherwise.

I used that email address, when I had the capability to get a "professional" one, because I didn't want to work at Stuffy Pre-Judging No Sense of Humor Ltd. If they disliked my address to the point where it would disqualify me, they sure wouldn't like me and I sure wouldn't like them.

Re:yes

[geminidomino]

Why is gmail better than hotmail or aol?

1. Your email is yours, not theirs: they don't insert ads.

I use gmail myself, but let's be honest. They don't insert ads into the mail itself, but there's no secret that the emails are scanned and used for ad targeting anyway.

Re:yes

[WinterSolstice]

Considering that what I hire are sober, professional, intelligent people who will have to pass an in-depth background check for security clearance; Yes.

You basically just told me "the system works".

I don't want people who can't handle stuffy places filled with politics. I want people who are level-headed, competent, and can be trusted to get the job done no matter what random stuff a client throws at them. If that client happens to be some weird .com holdover with a jeans and headshop t-shirt dress code, great. If it's a government contractor that requires suits and carefully worded emails, that's gotta be ok too.

There's 10% unemployment out there - don't join those ranks just because you think it's cool to be a frat boy at 35.

Re:yes

[mjwx]

Really? You're not going to consider someone because of their email address?

Yes,

Because an email address is an indicator of how professional one intends to act. If you put a thinly veiled reference to pot on your resume then expect not to get a job. I'd sooner accept JPerson@aol.com before PrincessJodie@hotmail.com and I've seen more then one resume which has had the latter style of address.

It really doesn't hurt to put a decent email address down on your resume, something simple and non offensive. I've seen resumes thrown out over more trivial things then an email address so it does count especially when a job has a lot of competition.

hell no!

[Anonymous Coward]

--
turdeater@sexual-perverts.net

I don't think it will cost you a job.

[AbRASiON]

but it sure will make you look a bit dopey if you're still rolling with hotmail or aol.
I see usa.net is still around too, I had one of those a long long time ago too.

Now if you're not rolling your own domain, gmail or at least a respectable ISP in the very least your co-workers will give you a bit of shit.

Actually yes -- in some cases

[weave]

If it's a technology person, that's a red flag. I'd expect them to at least have their own domain name. It doesn't cost THAT much and looks far more professional.

Heck, even my cat has her own domain name.

If it's a non-tech field, meh, I don't care that much. But I have to chuckle when I see a small business with a website and their own domain name, but still using @comcast or @aol on their business card for email.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[gorfie]

Given the cost-cutting trend we've seen in IT over the past decade, would the image of someone that spends additional money/time on unnecessary technology be appealing? I'm just playing devil's advocate here as I don't have a preference one way or another. That said, it could be that there are extremes in both directions and it's safest to sit in the middle.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[alen]

what is the point of your own domain name? i've seen plenty of good IT people who almost technologically illiterate in some areas. most of our devs don't know a single thing about administration of systems

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[fl!ptop]

But I have to chuckle when I see a small business with a website and their own domain name, but still using @comcast or @aol on their business card for email.

i can go one better - an attorney client has on his business cards name@laywers.com. except that the correct domain is lawyer.com. so every time he gives out a card he takes a pen and scratches out the 's'. yeah, that looks professional.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[weave]

Given the cost-cutting trend we've seen in IT over the past decade, would the image of someone that spends additional money/time on unnecessary technology be appealing?

A domain name and simple email plan from most registrar's is less than $40/year. That's hardly extravagant.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[chthon]

And I would rather use 40$/y for a subscription on a magazine.

When I ran a couple of years ago a small, single-person company, I had a domain name. It is interesting because it is deductible.

However, as a private person, I pay my internet subscription and as part of that I get up to five (familial) email addresses without hassle. Why should I invest in a private domain name ?

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[jank1887]

but its unnecessary if webmail serves your needs perfectly well.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[Skater]

However, as a private person, I pay my internet subscription and as part of that I get up to five (familial) email addresses without hassle. Why should I invest in a private domain name ?

One huge advantage is that you can keep the same email addresses even if you change ISPs.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[xaxa]

My real-name domain costs much less than that.

The .uk domain is £3.50 (ish) per year.
Many registrars provide free DNS, mine doesn't so I use everydns.net.
Google Apps for personal use is free.

Total cost: £3.50/year -- roughly the cost of a drink in a nightclub (round here).

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[Lumpy]

Most lawyers are not only uneducated in technology, but they are also raging cheapskates. They make wheelbarrow loads of cash compared to the typical worker yet they refuse to throw away a $25.00 box of incorrect business cards. Hell one I did work for refused to buy real network gear but complained that his network needed to be reboot regularly because the power in his shitty office was so bad it locked up the network gear. My cheap solution was a $129.00 UPS on the networking gear. He flipped out at how expensive it was. This was in line with every other lawyer I did work for. Some of the scummy ones will try and bully you into doing things for free. I ran a HDMI from his closet to his TV on the wall. Then they guy called back a year later threatening to sue me because he could not get composite video from his 8 year old VCR he brought from home to the TV. I told him he needed equipment to do that, he threatened to sue me because I listened to him when he said," No I only want the cable box on there, do not run any other wires." I reminded him of the documentation I had with his signature, plus emails, and I would gladly welcome his lawsuit.

I don't do any work for Lawyers anymore. They are some of the most unreasonable people on the planet.

Re:Actually yes -- in some cases

[KronicD]

Because it allows you to change ISP without issue. I've had my email addresses professional & personal for over a decade. I would hate to have to have to ask everyone to update their contacts whenever I swaped ISPs.

You can do this for less than the $40, I get mine from http://rofltron.com/ and host the email with google apps, but they include free email forwarding if you'd rather just keep receiving mail at your ISP address.

The advantage is portability. I know people who are still paying ~$10 a month to some ISP to keep forwarding their email. You don't want to be in that situation.

People aren't rational

[91degrees]

They will make judgements based on email addresses. They may be able to rationalise them. The rationalisations may or may not make sense but they will still make judgements.

You can either change human nature or change your email address.

Re:People aren't rational

[tnk1]

You are 100% correct, which is why I use a gmail address on my resume. It also helps that I joined early enough to get firstname.lastname@gmail.com so it looks pretty professional.

However, while I will change myself to suit stupid human nature, I will lose a lot of respect for anyone I discover is foolish enough to discard a resume based on email address unless the actual email address is indecent or completely unprofessional. That's like judging people as being your inferiors because they happen to have an address on the "other side of the tracks". If you handed me two resumes: one that had an aol.com address and another with a line that says "I reject applicants based on their aol.com address", I know which one I would send to the trash can without looking any further. The first applicant may be a little slow, but the second one is definitely unprofessional, and probably a bigot to boot.

The fact that these aol.com people could get a new email address if they wanted to is irrelevant. In my time, I have had an AOL account, a hotmail account, a yahoo account, as well as some cable company personal accounts, and of course my college and work email accounts. I found Gmail to be interesting, but it's not so much better than any other web mail account that the change is compelling. I don't see why any practically-minded person would bother switching unless it was to get a better user name or to suit irrational bigotry. It's not like they are insisting that the world is still flat by using an aol.com address.

Just you wait, AOL will come back into style

[dr2chase]

It will be totally retro, like bell-bottoms, hip-huggers, wide ties, and beehive hair-dos.

Maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I looking for a Cobol programmer or a .Net developer?

Not the domain

[Southpaw018]

Domain? No. Username? Yes.

I really don't care if someone has an AOL email address, though I work in a non-tech industry, so it may be different for me. However, the username is important. Here in DC, if you're straight out of an internship and you still have an email along the lines of drinkingfiend01@gmail.com, that's a negative mark. Similarly, a friend of mine who works in HR in San Francisco gets resumes all the time with emails the likes of johnissogay@whatever.com. Yeah, it's SF, but that's still not work appropriate.

Re:Not the domain

[RogueyWon]

Actually, the best example of this I've heard didn't come from an application I was processing myself. It was one my dad received, for an engineering position in his small business. The e-mail address was cokefiend@isp.com

Needless to say, the applicant didn't get the job. However, this being a small business (where people tend to worry a bit less about form and procedure), the rejection letter included the following line:

"PS. I prefer Pepsi myself"

Re:Not the domain

[cerberusss]

However, this being a small business (where people tend to worry a bit less about form and procedure), the rejection letter included the following line:

"PS. I prefer Pepsi myself"

Talking about worrying less about form and procedure.

When in college, I got a job offer which looked a lot like spam, including sentences like "an offer you can't refuse". Being the spontaneous type, I replied with a courteous: "Quit your spam, you ****sucking dope-snivelling ass*******".

I received a courteous reply back, saying it concerned a genuine job offer which ended with a "PS: we've got a big black man waiting for you in a dark closet".

I once had a guy bring it up in an interview

[thepainguy]

I was talking to a company about a semi-technical consulting job and their CTO pointed it out. I think he was semi-serious. We ended up not working together. Of course, this was 10 years ago and I had and AOL address because of their big dial-up network. That made sense given that I traveled a lot. How hard is it to sign up for g-mail?

Re:I once had a guy bring it up in an interview

[ZosX]

Pretty easy. Its out of beta (FINALLY!)

It's what comes before the @ that matters

[RogueyWon]

Depends. I've done a good few external hires over the last few years, and while I'd never actively sift on the basis of e-mail addresses, there's no denying that an outlandish one can make an impact (and probably not the sort you wan to make).

I wouldn't particularly care about an AOL address. I don't honestly think that any address which conforms to the firstname.lastname@isp.com format (or any other varation including initials, dots etc) will set any alarm bells ringing for any sensible employer.

However, there is one type of e-mail address that does cause me concern. This is the obvious "naughty" one. I've actually seen job applications listing addresses like partychick33@... or drunkenmick@... These do not give a good impression. Is it unfair? Probably. After all, there's nothing wrong with going out and enjoying yourself. However, using that e-mail address for a job application does imply that you have a problem when dealing with boundaries.

To sum up; a potential employer is far more likely to be put off by what comes before the @ in your e-mail address than by what comes afterwards.

Re:yeah

[plover]

Well, when a stack of 100 resumes is sitting in the in box, the first thing you have to do is weed them down to the three or four you're actually going to interview. The first 80 get tossed because the applicant isn't qualified. That leaves 20 who "may be" OK. Some will then get tossed because they're ugly, or contain spelling errors. A toxic email address might be a reason one ends up in the discard bin.

It's all going to depend on the person doing the hiring. If they have that "AOL == toxic" mindset, you lose. Ask yourself if you are willing to bet a future job hanging on to your oldtimer@AOL.com address.

hey!

[potaz]

Hey, I've actually done a comic on this subject! I'm firmly in the "I'd rather you have a cool email address then a suck-up one" camp.

Re:hey!

[Fanboy Fantasies]

holy shit it's you.

Re:hey!

[halcyon1234]

Hey, I've actually done a comic (http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1416) on this subject! I'm firmly in the "I'd rather you have a cool email address then a suck-up one" camp.

Funny, but could you provide an XKCD reference instead? =)

Re:hey!

[nahdude812]

The value in some comics is their artwork. The value in some comics is their humor or topics. I tend to prefer the latter. Dinosaur comics makes me laugh more consistently than almost any other comic out there.

I love the fact that his humor does not need to be propped up with artwork; it stands on its own.

Re:hey!

[fm6]

It the artwork doesn't matter, why is it even there?

Re:The real problem is often what the username is

[cerberusss]

something embarrassing before that @aol.com bit, like p4rtyg1rl69 or phillygansta92

TOTALLY EMBARRASING. Thus, I'd immediately 1) delete the mail from phillygangsta92 and 2) forward p4rtyg1rl69 to my personal e-mail account.

Re:I notice it.

[Frankie70]

Why is a GMail id better than a Yahoo id?

Nobody takes any notice- anon@biggotsfortheKKK.com

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody judges me by my email address

Username matters too

[Brandee07]

When I'm looking at a resume, I don't want to see RoxxyFoxxy@somewhere.com. Or something completely weird and difficult to decipher and type out. It's not hard to maintain a FMLastname or Firstname.Lastname@gmail.com and direct it to an address that expresses your individuality or whatnot.

Basically, I'm looking for professionalism. That means a resume with no typos or obvious errors/exaggerations ("Proficient in C, C+, and C++" is a gem that springs to mind), and appropriate attire at the interview. Having some kind of in-joke or bizarre reference or obscure handle as your username on the resume is kind of like wearing a tshirt with a weird slogan on it to the interview, although certainly not so severe.

Re:But it was the last domain available!

[starbugs]

Wow, you don't just have a domain, you have your own TLD!!!
That is so uber-cool!

(sorry about the rest of the domain though)

nicknames of the upmodded comments so far:

[circletimessquare]

"weave"
there isn't a joke that hasn't been made about girls with weaves

"RogueyWon"
you're roguey? is that like sarah palin being mavericky?

"thepainguy"
hello mr. S&M. go spank behinds somewhere else

"Southpaw018"
ah yes, the proud left handed type, always announcing his left handed status without prompting. almost as annoying as the proud "i don't watch tv" type so damn proud of what nobody cares about

"91degrees"
makes me think of that lame pop band 98 degrees

"Pharmboy"
do you spam c1alis emails? or do sell adderall on your local college campus?

"MistrBlank"
i'm sorry for your reproductive issues. in vitro fertilization offers wonderful outcomes nowadays

point being: prejudice is ignorant, all-pervasive, and easy. the idea is not that you should conform your email/ nickname to such small minds, but that if you lose a contact, or a job, due to such small minds, you should consider yourself LUCKY for the loss of contact with such mediocre people

i know well-respected medical doctors with aol addresses from the 1990s. because they don't have time to play mindless little image games like this one. this whole issue is stupid

It is telling...

[jotaeleemeese]

... how such idiocy is moderated insightful as I write....

I am sure I am a the top of my game in what I do.

The only 2 email addresses I ever had are are considered by some as "unprofessional" (as in oh my good, he is not paying for a service that he can get for free! The horror!).

So, does that obtuse view of some about the world should count more than a measured approach to the capabilities of somebody?

I say no, but again, I am at the top of my game, worked in many places in different countries, and occasionally interviewed and managed a few people in some companies of certain fame, so perhaps my opinion is atypical.

Re:It is telling...

[clone53421]

The only 2 email addresses I ever had are are considered by some as "unprofessional" (as in oh my good, he is not paying for a service that he can get for free! The horror!).

As in, why don’t you at least have a good free e-mail provider, like Gmail? (Hopefully at least one of those two addresses is Gmail. If not, why not?)

Free does not equal unprofessional. In fact, I’d put a free account from a good e-mail service (e.g. Gmail) slightly above an e-mail account that’s being provided by your current employer, which you’re probably not supposed to be using for non-work-related purposes.

Gmail is pretty much sterile (neither beneficial nor harmful). Hotmail/Yahoo is a small step down from that, and AOL is somewhere in the cellar. Owning your own domain, of course, gives you a step up on the competition.

Re:It is telling...

[aicrules]

Yeah, I don't have any problem with someone using any particular email domain (well okay maybe goatse) for their personal email. My thoughts change when it comes to businesses though. I understand that small businesses don't have their own email domain necessarily, and some don't see the value of it at all, but when I see advertising for a business with @aol.com, @earthlink.net, @anythinggeneric.whatever I really have to wonder about them. If you know it's worth having an internet presence, but you can't put out the $50 (max) a year for your own email domain, then why on earth should I trust you with my money!

Re:It is telling...

[clone53421]

Sure.

Back when Gmail was first getting started, it offered ... what, a gigabyte of storage? or was it two gigabytes? Hotmail, on the other hand, was offering a measly two megabytes. It also allowed much larger attachments. Reason enough to switch right there. Don’t think I’m stuck in the past, though. I can keep going.

The spam filtering alone is reason enough to switch. Hotmail’s spam filtering is pitiful. Gmail’s is nearly bulletproof.

Nice, non-animated, non-blinking, non-colourful, generally non-irritating advertisements... compared to Hotmail’s, which exhibit in every way the polar opposites of all those qualities. Sure, Gmail’s ads are targeted based on trigger words in the e-mail I’m reading, but even so it’s not like an actual person at Gmail is reading my messages.

Gmail is fast. Fast load. Fast message opening. Fast search (from Google? who’da thunkit?). Fast just about everything. Since the whole application loads at the outset, all it has to fetch to open a message or display your inbox (or any other label) is just the data that it needs to load. All done by Ajax, all very fast. The only thing that takes any considerable amount of time is loading the whole thing to begin with, and even that is relatively quick if you consider all the time it saves in the long run. Vs. Hotmail, which loads an entire new entire page, complete with rich advertisements, virtually every time you click anything.

Basically, everything that Hotmail does, Gmail does better. I honestly can’t find anything to criticize.

Re:I notice it.

[Algan]

Because gmail supports imap and pop3, while yahoo doesn't. Just my $0.02.

Re: Okay

[TaoPhoenix]

"President@whitehouse.gov"

Like us?

[jotaeleemeese]

Sorry buddy, don't use plural.

I will judge people based on their merits and not on puerile assumptions.

I call that "us" professional people..

Absolutely not.

[jotaeleemeese]

Why should i care about what service provider they are using?

What is next people? Are you going to check also if they are using an iPhone or not? The kind of car they drive? The newspapers they read?

Unless the email address is obviously offensive, I see no reason whatsoever to even be thinking about it.

Those people saying that IT people should have their own domain, honestly, get a life. Have a domain and associated website if you want to, but it is outlandish to suggest it should be a de facto thing.

I personally invest enough hours at work doing technology stuff, I have no need or inclination to be running a website at home. It is called balance, something some people around here should be aiming more for.

Personal domain a must?! For bunnies sakes ....

Re:Absolutely not.

[DragonTHC]

If the job entailed cars or phones or newspapers, then yes, I would hope potential employers would choose to hire someone with an actual interest in the work rather than not.

If applying for IT and you give an AOL email address, you probably aren't very attuned to IT.

I have a client who is a mortgage broker and keeps using his aol email for business. I keep telling him to use his business email. He really can't afford to lose business over an email.

Re:Absolutely not.

[tnk1]

If applying for IT and you give an AOL email address, you probably aren't very attuned to IT.

All I get from that statement is that you believe that being "attuned to IT" means that you need to be fashionable in some non-practical way. Until I hear that AOL email actually ceases to function as an application that you can send to and receive email from, I don't see anything wrong with it.

To my mind, you are not very "attuned to IT" if you think it is a good business practice to jump between email providers like a crazed monkey whenever you think it stops being fashionable. For one thing, moving providers and giving out your new contact information is added work that you should only do if you absolutely need to do it. An email address, even with an unfashionable email provider, becomes like a business phone number. It costs real time and money to make the change or you can lose existing, paying customers.

I have a client who is a mortgage broker and keeps using his aol email for business. I keep telling him to use his business email. He really can't afford to lose business over an email.

I actually think you are right, because if he actually has a business email, there are a lot of reasons to use it, including, but not limited to, the potential silly bigotry. That does not justify the bigotry, it's just practical. The people who would judge you on your email domain are still fools, but in this case, you want money and fools are good sources of ready income.

Re:Not lame, it's antique

[vlm]

Therefore there is geoCities address in my CV next to the solid list of known technologies - in fact, it proved to be
more persistent, than one of current ISP.

Isn't geocities down since October last year?

Developers, OK. Companies, no.

[meiao]

I wouldn't be bothered that much for a developer. But for a company, that would be a no no.

Re: Okay

[jank1887]

or
"President@whitehouse.com"

might get you in the door faster.

Not just equal, but exceeding

[dazedNconfuzed]

The idea, which the "so what" crowd seems to miss, is that the candidate not only have an "equal" address, but should stand out somehow. As parent notes, it doesn't take much to get your own domain, but doing so shows you DO pay attention to polishing details and DO know enough to make those details happen - to wit, going above and beyond.

The question should not be "should AOL etc. addresses be discriminated against", it should be "does the candidate excel beyond his 'equals'?"

(Yes I do have my own domain; my personal email is my name (al la first@last.TLD). I'm amused by how hard it is for people to comprehend this, and how amazed they are when they realize it.)

Re:yeah

[Brad Mace]

Really? Pretty much everyone with any tech savvy abandoned aol years ago. Also, anyone with any tech savvy knows how AOL is regarded. So if you apply for a tech job with an @aol, you're telling them you're either clueless, stubborn, or just totally lacking in common sense. All of those seem like valid reasons to toss an application if you need to thin the pile. For a less tech-oriented job I wouldn't consider it such a big deal, but with so many jobs requiring some level of computer usage, who wants to hire someone with AOL-level computer skills?

Would a nutritionist apply with an @mcdonalds.com email? A truck driver with an @alcoholicsanonymous email? It's just common sense.

Re:Oh please.

[mike2R]

I'm sure there are, and I'm sure it works well. I don't do recruitment, but I certainly judge customers on their email addresses. Selling admittedly fairly technical products, aol address == tech support nightmare waiting to happen.

Oh and don't get me started on people with the first name of 'Ignatius'. Arseholes the lot of them (well all 3 that I've dealt with in 9 years were, and that's enough of a pattern for me) :)

Actually...

[autocracy]

I won't show up to an interview with a cravat, but I do wear a top hat and bridge coat when I walk to work in the winter. It's quite a bit of fun. I work at a CPA firm.

Re:Actually...

[mog007]

I don't suppose you also snub beggar children on the street with the phrase "humbug" as well?

Old school addresses

[aaronrp]

I prefer the following:

UUCP: {world}!ucbvax!ucscc!ucscb!aaronrp

Professional Societies & E-mail Forwarding

[SirGarlon]

Even if you happen to hang on to your AOL e-mail address because you don't want to change it, there's no need to put it on your resume.

The professional societies to which I belong -- IEEE and ACM -- as well as my alma mater, offer e-mail forwarding addresses. So I can set up a respectable-looking e-mail address, such as sirgarlon@alumni.almamater.edu, and have that redirect to the address I actually use. Who cares if that address is doofus123@aol.com? My business associates ain't gonna know.

I would be quite surprised if societies for other professions, such as law or medicine or even journalism, don't have similar services.

If that's insightful I'm a curried bagel

[Anonymous Coward]

Get over yourself already.

Having an AOL email address is no more an indication that the owner is for or against innovation than the colour of their skin, their gender or the cut of their jeans. You're confusing the whimsical ebb and flow of fashion with technological advance. For what it is worth, you also took his reference to not messing with things which work right out of context.

You might just as well have started your email, "Times change, people's prejudices change..."

You need to take a long hard look at yourself before you start justifying the nonsense you spout.

Re:Oh please.

[Alcimedes]

I think there's a misundertsanding as to how the hiring process works.

First, you get a ton of resumes in. Far more than you could interview, so step one.

Get rid of people.

The first step in almost any hiring process is to figure out which people you don't want. This is where little stupid things screw you over. Depending on how many resumes a hiring manager has, having an @aol.com email address just might be enough to get your resume thrown in the "don't bother" pile. At the end of the day they still have 30 good, qualified people to start phone interviews with, what do they care if they had 31?

Re: easier to have a webmail address

[webreaper]

And more importantly, if you have a domain name you're not tied into the webmail provider OR your ISP.

I have firstname@lastname.com as my email address (yes, it's a bit generic - ha!). All my email accounts on my domain are consolidated within a gmail account, but now they allow me to properly use my own SMTP server via GMail, I can completely invisibly do this. So nobody sending mail to or receiving mail from me knows it's all done by Gmail.

Not only am I completely decoupled from my ISP, I'm also decoupled from my mail provider. If Google does something I don't like, or something better comes along (unlikely, but possible) I can switch my email instantly at no cost. Likewise, if I'm unlucky enough to have my mail suspended for some reason, again, I'm not at GMail's mercy.

Complete lack of reliance on mail provider and ISP is the only way to be sure.

You're kidding, right?

[QuietLagoon]

Would an AOL e-mail address or another 'toxic' e-mail address influence your decision to hire someone?"

.
If you make hiring decisions based upon unrelated-to-the-job things like email addresses, then you deserve the level of employees that you get. What's next, not hiring someone because the name of the street they live on is dorky?

The wisdom of the herd

[Anonymous Coward]

If you live amongst fools, who are riddled with prejudices, then smart as you are, you are at their mercy and will have to adapt.

These things are self fulfilling; if the crowd believes people with big eyes are witches, then it might make sense for people with big eyes to squint a little - daft as the belief of the crowd might be.

It's sad that we have to alter our lifestyle to accommodate the whim and chance thought of the massed ranks of fools.

could an email address be to pretentious too?

[peter303]

I could use my stanford.edu or mit.edu alumni forwarding addresses in a job search. But I have been pretty lucky and haven't needed to cold-call a job app in a couple of decades.

Re:yeah

[swillden]

Really? Pretty much everyone with any tech savvy abandoned aol years ago.

Pretty much anyone with any tech savvy avoided AOL from the beginning.

Bonus Catch-22 reference

[Quiet_Desperation]

This is why I maintain a relationship with a good headhunter. The idea of trying to deal with the "random filter of the week" person staffing the HR desk at any moment in any company is just depressing. Oh no, this one used dots instead of dashes for list bullets. Must be a drug user. Oops, this one didn't embolden the section headers. Obviously a lazy worker.

Hey, Yossarian is looking at the resumes today. Death to modifiers!

It's a filter against lame managers

[dotwhynot]

Personally, I see it the other way around, as an effective way of weeding out the managers you really don’t want to work for.

I’m a competent and experienced IT professional that have been using Hotmail for a long time, and I’m quite happy with it for the purpose it serves. Tried Gmail, didn’t see the reason to switch. I could say more about why I prefer Hotmail, but that’s not really the point here.

If I apply for a job and someone calling themselves a manager is so “clever” that s/he is actually judging people based on such inane criteria as the choice of email provider, not the CV or references, then I will be very, very, very happy that I don’t have to work for such a close-minded, judgmental manager that is not able to prioritize what’s important. Very happy, thank you!

I would NOT hire someone...

[flajann]

Seriously, I would have reservations about hiring someone who had an AOL email address. Yahoo and GMail are fine. Personal domain name email address would be a plus. Email address at their current place of employment would be a bit off-putting, but tolerable.

I just can't see sophisticated software engineers, DBAs, systems engineers, of anyone else in IT carrying an AOL email address with a straight face.

Re: easier to have a webmail address

[Enleth]

Buy your own domain, attach a Google Apps account to it. The best of both worlds, truly.

Degrees of stupid

[CAIMLAS]

Really, what it comes down to is a social assessment of a persons' technical ability and/or competence.

I'm a sysadmin. If I were to deal with someone with an @aol.com or @hotmail.com, I'd think a combination of the following things:

1) They're older.
2) They're technologically and/or socially conservative.
3) They're incompetent (when it comes to computers).

There's no technical advantage to using either of those domains for email; that's why they've got the stigma, and why people have moved away to other web based mail.

These might not be 'correct' implications, but the stigma is there, just the same - even though someone with an @live.com address wouldn't likely have the same stigma.

If I were a writer, I'd not worry about it so much. For most people, an email address shows nothing more about them than their physical mailing address (even if it's something stupid, like discgolfbum@hotmail.com).

If I were an IT hiring manager or something like that, hiring for a Linux administrator, an @live.com or similar email address would dissuade me somewhat from interest in said candidate. In IT, there is a degree of technical savvy which needs to be demonstrated in a person's personal technology choices - preferably pertaining to their expertise.

Meanwhile, those of us who have had our own vanity domains and host our email through that will never face this problem.