If you could call a dried cranberry a Craisin, any individual could market to poor, helpless consumers, a poisonous colloid capable of instantaneously eating away internal organs. It's to PROTECT THE CONSUMER... DUH.. Wait...
Wow, does anyone here understand trademarks? Or maybe a better question to ask, if you do not understand trademarks, why do you post as if you do?
To piss off people who pick on uninformed individuals.... we do it for kicks. Sometimes we also do it to get the very same people to type a whole bunch of crap in response, thus boosting the carpal tunnel treatment racket.
Valid and good point... but remember that once you use a verb that you haven't used before, you'll question its origin. You'll then likely visit the place of origin (in this case, Google.) That's great PR.
Also, they could be discouraging its use to invoke the "bigger dick effect." This, in essence, states that if you request something from someone and they don't agree, it will encourage them to do so to a greater degree (use Google in everyday language more, spreading the word... so to speak) Just my $.02
Still don't agree with it but the choice between defending my principles and paying my bills is a quick choice. If you're unemployed you'll likely find your credit rating getting worse anyway.
I was going to say... well, I will ask anyway.
What do you think about people whose credit scores are low BECAUSE of non-performance-related layoff? How are these (often VERY good) people to find a job if more and more companies are discriminating on this alone?
Exactly. I'm in the same boat, and will be for a long time because I made the mistake of listening to marketing garbage when I was "young and stupid." I'm still young, but no longer stupid. Won't touch a credit card application if my life depended on it, because I've found that often IT DOES.
What about people who lost their income due to circumstances out of their control, and now have a poor credit rating as a result? Just trying to see where that fits in.
If you don't owe money, you're available for a bribe. If you do, you're also available. If you (as the subject of the bribe) are intelligent you'd also realize that if you owe money, you probably wouln't accept a bribe because it would be kind of obvious due to the sudden change in your financial status if an investigation were done past-act, that something had occurred. If you want to preempt every crime in the workplace, install monitoring cameras and fingerprint-based systems everywhere in said business (including the crapper.) Not arguing... agreeing, but attempting to gain further perspective from you.
The sheer obviousness is staggering. Your credit score has nothing to do with your ability to perform a function (unless your function is to maintain or improve a company's or individual's credit rating.) Note: I'm not arguing with you. The question is, how would one prove this if it went to court? Another question would be: is it worth taking to court? I'm both a high school drop-out and a debtor. I'm a high school drop-out because I was beaten and harassed daily in school, and I'm a debtor (connotation implied) because I was laid off for financial reasons (very recently.) I have over 8 years of experience in the computer field, and 6 in I.T. as both a leader and a trusted technical resource. It's obvious from my case alone that graduating from an educational institution and maintaining a high credit score are not indicators of ability or success. I await feedback!:)
Corporate psychologists either sitting in on interviews -OR- coaching interviewers seems to be the only way to go. You can't judge someone on what they've done in the past (self-evident), and you can't predict what someone's going to do in the future either (also self-evident.)
I would think that cross-interviewing would only work when an HR person is involved. If a similarly-charged official of the company were interviewing and noticed your legal savvy / insight, might they simply pass on you on account of you being a threat to their authority? I'm extremely interested in your unique perspective on this.
You could make it illegal for all insurance companies to base rates on your credit score, but they'd just find another way to do it. The new way probably wouldn't be as easily visible. I'm not arguing with you; it would be a GREAT first step. I'm just an eternal pessimist.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a VERB!!!! Bush would be SO PROUD!
Be careful. Amazon could shut this whole operation down with their new patent...
If you could call a dried cranberry a Craisin, any individual could market to poor, helpless consumers, a poisonous colloid capable of instantaneously eating away internal organs. It's to PROTECT THE CONSUMER... DUH..
Wait...
*lol*
Wow, does anyone here understand trademarks? Or maybe a better question to ask, if you do not understand trademarks, why do you post as if you do?
To piss off people who pick on uninformed individuals.... we do it for kicks.
Sometimes we also do it to get the very same people to type a whole bunch of crap in response, thus boosting the carpal tunnel treatment racket.
My God, man! I've never seen anyone on /. admit they were wrong about anything. You rule.
Valid and good point...
but remember that once you use a verb that you haven't used before, you'll question its origin. You'll then likely visit the place of origin (in this case, Google.) That's great PR.
Also, they could be discouraging its use to invoke the "bigger dick effect." This, in essence, states that if you request something from someone and they don't agree, it will encourage them to do so to a greater degree (use Google in everyday language more, spreading the word... so to speak)
Just my $.02
We didn't think anyone would actually READ that crap.. damn.. delete that page!
Hope google doesn't have it cached.. lol
I represent legal counsel for Disney, and......
hahaha
YOu better be quiet! Adobe WILL SUE!
Why are you so bitter? It was a simple question.
Still don't agree with it but the choice between defending my principles and paying my bills is a quick choice. If you're unemployed you'll likely find your credit rating getting worse anyway. I was going to say... well, I will ask anyway. What do you think about people whose credit scores are low BECAUSE of non-performance-related layoff? How are these (often VERY good) people to find a job if more and more companies are discriminating on this alone?
Exactly. I'm in the same boat, and will be for a long time because I made the mistake of listening to marketing garbage when I was "young and stupid."
I'm still young, but no longer stupid. Won't touch a credit card application if my life depended on it, because I've found that often IT DOES.
What about people who lost their income due to circumstances out of their control, and now have a poor credit rating as a result?
Just trying to see where that fits in.
If you don't owe money, you're available for a bribe. If you do, you're also available.
If you (as the subject of the bribe) are intelligent you'd also realize that if you owe money, you probably wouln't accept a bribe because it would be kind of obvious due to the sudden change in your financial status if an investigation were done past-act, that something had occurred.
If you want to preempt every crime in the workplace, install monitoring cameras and fingerprint-based systems everywhere in said business (including the crapper.)
Not arguing... agreeing, but attempting to gain further perspective from you.
The sheer obviousness is staggering. Your credit score has nothing to do with your ability to perform a function (unless your function is to maintain or improve a company's or individual's credit rating.) :)
Note: I'm not arguing with you.
The question is, how would one prove this if it went to court? Another question would be: is it worth taking to court?
I'm both a high school drop-out and a debtor. I'm a high school drop-out because I was beaten and harassed daily in school, and I'm a debtor (connotation implied) because I was laid off for financial reasons (very recently.)
I have over 8 years of experience in the computer field, and 6 in I.T. as both a leader and a trusted technical resource. It's obvious from my case alone that graduating from an educational institution and maintaining a high credit score are not indicators of ability or success.
I await feedback!
Corporate psychologists either sitting in on interviews -OR- coaching interviewers seems to be the only way to go.
You can't judge someone on what they've done in the past (self-evident), and you can't predict what someone's going to do in the future either (also self-evident.)
I would think that cross-interviewing would only work when an HR person is involved. If a similarly-charged official of the company were interviewing and noticed your legal savvy / insight, might they simply pass on you on account of you being a threat to their authority?
I'm extremely interested in your unique perspective on this.
You could make it illegal for all insurance companies to base rates on your credit score, but they'd just find another way to do it. The new way probably wouldn't be as easily visible. I'm not arguing with you; it would be a GREAT first step. I'm just an eternal pessimist.
Nice idea, but the market's too flooded. They probably wouldn't even call 90% of the 'applicants' back.
How does he appear illiterate? I'd like to know because it looked fine to me.