Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1370667 times)

1 Member and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

nuit93

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1162
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4860 on: November 06, 2013, 11:49:09 AM »
7 of the Worst Resumés Ever

Listing a previous job as "Marijuana dealer & nefarious dude," for example, may not be a good career move. Says the article, "Let this be a reminder that you don't have to include every job you've ever had."

I have some sneaking sympathy for the no-longer-nefarious dude. His resume says, post nefariousness, he "got himself right", and had been so for many years.

I would admit that running a profitable drug operation would give you many transferable skills, as long as you didn't transfer the attitude towards legal compliance along with it.

Been watching Breaking Bad lately? ;)

Tea Drinker

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1401
  • Now part of Team Land Crab
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4861 on: November 06, 2013, 02:50:40 PM »
Another one bites the dust: The Washington Times Fires Rand Paul for Plagiarizing Column

Quote
Last week, Politico and MSNBC reported that some of Paul's speeches included plagiarized passages from the Wikipedia pages of Gattaca and Stand and Deliver, as well as language from Associated Press articles. And this past weekend, BuzzFeed reported that Paul copied at least three pages of his 2013 book, Government Bullies, from a 2003 Heritage Foundation study.

Head, meet desk.
AP is going to nail his behind to a wall.  They feel that there is no such thing as "fair use"; they won't even let you quote a snippet of one of their stories on a forum or in a blog, or put a link to one of their stories.  They will allow you to do it IF you pay for the use of the whole article, at $2.50 per word.

AP will definitely get a lawyer to write him a letter, but what will happen from there is anyone's guess. I am not a lawyer, but I do know that AP has tried and failed to enforce "linking is a violation of our copyright" in the past. Copyright law is complicated, but that doesn't mean they get to write their own: it's still up to what Congress and the courts say the law is.
Any advice that requires the use of a time machine may safely be ignored.

Elfmama

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6188
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4862 on: November 06, 2013, 02:58:20 PM »
Another one bites the dust: The Washington Times Fires Rand Paul for Plagiarizing Column

Quote
Last week, Politico and MSNBC reported that some of Paul's speeches included plagiarized passages from the Wikipedia pages of Gattaca and Stand and Deliver, as well as language from Associated Press articles. And this past weekend, BuzzFeed reported that Paul copied at least three pages of his 2013 book, Government Bullies, from a 2003 Heritage Foundation study.

Head, meet desk.
AP is going to nail his behind to a wall.  They feel that there is no such thing as "fair use"; they won't even let you quote a snippet of one of their stories on a forum or in a blog, or put a link to one of their stories.  They will allow you to do it IF you pay for the use of the whole article, at $2.50 per word.

AP will definitely get a lawyer to write him a letter, but what will happen from there is anyone's guess. I am not a lawyer, but I do know that AP has tried and failed to enforce "linking is a violation of our copyright" in the past. Copyright law is complicated, but that doesn't mean they get to write their own: it's still up to what Congress and the courts say the law is.
I know, it's crazy.  I'd think that a news service would WANT linking!  But if you are an ordinary middle-class blogger, you may not have the $$$$$$ to engage in a lawsuit against something as big as AP. No matter who 'wins,' you  lose.  :-\
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
It's true. Money can't buy happiness.  You have to turn it
into books first.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Slartibartfast

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 11768
    • Nerdy Necklaces - my Etsy shop!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4863 on: November 06, 2013, 04:54:43 PM »
There is a channel on Twitter, #MSWL, where literary agents sometimes post things they'd love to see from authors.  Often it's fairly specific, e.g. "I would love to see a sprawling, complex, adult Mists-of-Avalon treatment of Greek mythology or the Iliad."  Sometimes it's more general, sometimes it's a new agent building a list, but it's always fun to browse because you never know when someone just happens to be daydreaming about reading the exact thing you're trying to sell.

The thing with Twitter hashtags, though, is that anyone can use them.  And a small number of authors seem to have gotten the idea that if they spam an advertisement for their manuscript/self-published book/movie script idea with the #MSWL hashtag, agents are all going to see it and come beating down their door wanting to represent it.  Of course, all that really happens is that a) other authors have to wade through all the drek, and b) agents see their names and associate them with "There's the guy who has NO IDEA how the industry works!"

PastryGoddess

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4843
    • My Image Portfolio and Store
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4864 on: November 06, 2013, 04:57:17 PM »
There is a channel on Twitter, #MSWL, where literary agents sometimes post things they'd love to see from authors.  Often it's fairly specific, e.g. "I would love to see a sprawling, complex, adult Mists-of-Avalon treatment of Greek mythology or the Iliad."  Sometimes it's more general, sometimes it's a new agent building a list, but it's always fun to browse because you never know when someone just happens to be daydreaming about reading the exact thing you're trying to sell.

The thing with Twitter hashtags, though, is that anyone can use them.  And a small number of authors seem to have gotten the idea that if they spam an advertisement for their manuscript/self-published book/movie script idea with the #MSWL hashtag, agents are all going to see it and come beating down their door wanting to represent it.  Of course, all that really happens is that a) other authors have to wade through all the drek, and b) agents see their names and associate them with "There's the guy who has NO IDEA how the industry works!"
I follow that twitter feed and hashtag as well.  I find that sooo annoying

onikenbai

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4865 on: November 06, 2013, 10:42:28 PM »
And yet, the mayor of Toronto still has a job.   ::)

The Ford story for those of you who are not from Toronto:
Gets caught reading while driving on the highway (illegal).  Response: So what?  I'm a busy guy.
Gets caught talking on cell while driving. (illegal) Response: So what?  I'm a busy guy.
Alleged video of him smoking crack with drug dealers.  Response:  I do not use crack cocaine.
Gets kicked out of official government event for showing up drunk.  No response.
Refuses to participate in pride themed events for his entire tenure as mayor.  Response:  I'm spending time with my family.
Shows up at major street festival completely and utterly hammered.  Response:  Dude, I'm not driving.  (I'm actually ok with this one)
Ford writes letters of recommendation for two friends on City letterhead.  Friends are both convicted criminals of serious felonies.
Video of crack smoking is recovered by police.  Also reported to contain racist and homophobic slurs, explaining his reluctance to participate in pride activities.  Response:  I may have occasionally smoked crack in one of my drunken stupors.  The police chief has a vendetta against me for recovering the video and the police chief should resign as he is doing a terrible job.
Ford admits to smoking crack but denies being an addict.  Denies lying about it earlier citing that the media "were asking the wrong questions".
Yesterday, evidence that Ford has been paying the utility bills for the crack house is uncovered.  No response from Ford.

Why is he still in office?  There is no impeachment law for city officials.  Until he voluntarily steps down (which he isn't going to do) there is nothing anybody can do.  He promises to run for office in 2014.  For all the things that have been caught on tape, I wonder what he's been up to that hasn't been caught on tape?!

snowfire

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2273
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4866 on: November 06, 2013, 11:53:24 PM »
^^^ What the heck????? I'm amazed that there is no way to get this walking FUBAR out of office!

Elfmama

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6188
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4867 on: November 07, 2013, 12:08:49 AM »
And are none of these criminal offenses?  When you are elected mayor of Toronto, do they issue you a Teflon suit, so that criminal offenses just slide away?
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
It's true. Money can't buy happiness.  You have to turn it
into books first.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

onikenbai

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4868 on: November 07, 2013, 12:36:30 AM »
And are none of these criminal offenses?  When you are elected mayor of Toronto, do they issue you a Teflon suit, so that criminal offenses just slide away?

Until he admitted to smoking the crack, the most serious thing he had done was the cell phone and reading while driving, both of which he could receive tickets for, but the cop wasn't around when the pictures were taken, so he got away with it.  Until he admitted it was crack in that pipe, there was no conclusive evidence that it wasn't some other substance, and therefore absolutely nothing to charge him with.  He did also admit that he smoked a lot of pot, but that's not really a big deal here either as we're kind of flexible on that in the legal department.  There's no way that a drug charge of a guy appearing to smoke crack once on a video is ever going to stick in the courts so yeah, Teflon boy.  Besides, if he were no longer mayor, there would no longer be an endless source of entertainment for the city. 

Word on the street is that Ford's main competitor for mayor next year is going to be Jack Layton, and that Layton has a strong chance of winning.  The fact that Layton died a year and a half ago seems to be immaterial.

kherbert05

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10402
    • Trees downed in my yard by Ike and the clean up
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4869 on: November 07, 2013, 12:38:06 AM »
The Mom that sent her kid out in a KKK costume - read some of her interviews. The family are bigots and she supports their position.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-kkk-halloween-costume-draws-threats-article-1.1505265
Don't Teach Them For Your Past. Teach Them For Their Future

blue2000

  • It is never too late to be what you might have been
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6841
  • Two kitties - No waiting. And no sleeping either.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4870 on: November 07, 2013, 01:23:14 AM »
And are none of these criminal offenses?  When you are elected mayor of Toronto, do they issue you a Teflon suit, so that criminal offenses just slide away?

Until he admitted to smoking the crack, the most serious thing he had done was the cell phone and reading while driving, both of which he could receive tickets for, but the cop wasn't around when the pictures were taken, so he got away with it.  Until he admitted it was crack in that pipe, there was no conclusive evidence that it wasn't some other substance, and therefore absolutely nothing to charge him with.  He did also admit that he smoked a lot of pot, but that's not really a big deal here either as we're kind of flexible on that in the legal department.  There's no way that a drug charge of a guy appearing to smoke crack once on a video is ever going to stick in the courts so yeah, Teflon boy.  Besides, if he were no longer mayor, there would no longer be an endless source of entertainment for the city. 

Word on the street is that Ford's main competitor for mayor next year is going to be Jack Layton, and that Layton has a strong chance of winning.  The fact that Layton died a year and a half ago seems to be immaterial.

So hilarious, and yet so true. Layton would win by a landslide. :P
You are only young once. After that you have to think up some other excuse.

wx4caster

  • Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 545
    • wx4caster's Crafty Albums
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4871 on: November 07, 2013, 09:37:56 AM »
And are none of these criminal offenses?  When you are elected mayor of Toronto, do they issue you a Teflon suit, so that criminal offenses just slide away?

Until he admitted to smoking the crack, the most serious thing he had done was the cell phone and reading while driving, both of which he could receive tickets for, but the cop wasn't around when the pictures were taken, so he got away with it.  Until he admitted it was crack in that pipe, there was no conclusive evidence that it wasn't some other substance, and therefore absolutely nothing to charge him with.  He did also admit that he smoked a lot of pot, but that's not really a big deal here either as we're kind of flexible on that in the legal department.  There's no way that a drug charge of a guy appearing to smoke crack once on a video is ever going to stick in the courts so yeah, Teflon boy.  Besides, if he were no longer mayor, there would no longer be an endless source of entertainment for the city. 

Word on the street is that Ford's main competitor for mayor next year is going to be Jack Layton, and that Layton has a strong chance of winning.  The fact that Layton died a year and a half ago seems to be immaterial.

Hey, Tuxedo Stan (a cat) tried to run for mayor here in Halifax last year. Although, he wasn't able to register due to a some technicality (no Social Insurance Number or unknown birth date - the details are fuzzy now).
The days are long but the years are short.

snowfire

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2273
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4872 on: November 07, 2013, 09:59:58 AM »

Hey, Tuxedo Stan (a cat) tried to run for mayor here in Halifax last year. Although, he wasn't able to register due to a some technicality (no Social Insurance Number or unknown birth date - the details are fuzzy now).

And, since Stan crossed to the Rainbow Bridge this year, his brother Earl Grey ran for Premier.  ;D

I'd probably vote for the dead guy instead of Teflon Boy.  Sheeesh!  I hope your elections are soon and that Teflon Boy can't do much damage until then.

hjaye

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4873 on: November 07, 2013, 10:05:04 AM »
7 of the Worst Resumés Ever

Listing a previous job as "Marijuana dealer & nefarious dude," for example, may not be a good career move. Says the article, "Let this be a reminder that you don't have to include every job you've ever had."

Or,
Quote
This overeager jobseeker noticed the Technical Director of a company had died, and then mistook that as a chance to get his foot in the door by applying for the deceased’s job. His cover letter stated “Each time I apply for a job, I get a reply that there’s no vacancy but in this case I have caught you red-handed and you have no excuse because I even attended the funeral to be sure that he was truly dead and buried before applying.”

He then attached a copy of the man’s death certificate along with his resume. Yup. Just let that classiness wash over you for a second.
The article has links to original stories about the resumés

I'll give him points for knowing what the word nefarious means............... :)

Twik

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 28633
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4874 on: November 07, 2013, 10:17:15 AM »
It's unlikely Ford would get re-elected at this point, but I think that there *should* be a reluctance to remove someone chosen by the voters from office unless they have done something seriously wrong (say, been convicted of a felony). For good or ill, he was the voters' choice, and unless he's selling the stuff to kids going through City Hall on school tours, I think it sets a bad precedent to throw out an elected official simply because he's not "upstanding".  As a previous poster has said, there's not a lot that Ford could actually be convicted on right now, at least for serious charges.
My cousin's memoir of love and loneliness while raising a child with multiple disabilities will be out on Amazon soon! Know the Night, by Maria Mutch, has been called "full of hope, light, and companionship for surviving the small hours of the night."