Comments on: Comments Shmomments

By: Dave Staats

Dave Staats — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:14:15 +0000

I don’t speak for Bush…but it looks to me like you are unaware that there are various types of wikipedia now and that the term is plural making ‘the wikipedia’ correct in this case.
Are you the guy in the FedEx commercial who wanted to send his package to Pu-ho-nix?

By: interested 3rd party

interested 3rd party — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:01:02 +0000

“I need to go find a list of people who claim they have read all the Wikipedia so I can leverage their incredible knowledge.”

The wikipedia, Dave? Nice.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/23/bush-says-he-uses-the-google/

By: Dennis Smith

Dennis Smith — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:34:49 +0000

Dear David Schmavid regarding Comments Schomments,

Excellent point! Seriously, I agree with the “now” benefit that LinkedIn has to offer. I suppose the the folks that are highly connected on LinkedIn have been around for so long, I honestly don’t even think much about it anymore.

However, I COMPLETELY agree with your thoughts about the benefit of LinkedIn to me. Whether I am connected to a person on LinkedIn or not, has no bearing on whether I can reach out and find them. If I need to contact them, I will. Connection or not. Too many recruiters have felt the only benefit they’d derive from LinkedIn lies in the number of connections. Your post helped remind us that this is not true.

Thanks David

By: Dave Staats

Dave Staats — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:24:54 +0000

Please reiterate any inquiry you think is unanswered. And you sense my angry what? Or did you mean “you’re”. You remind me of someone else who ran out of bullets for her knife when she started a fight once…but you aren’t salting your nonsense with Inappropriately capitalized Words like She does. And if you aren’t her ,we can let that sleeping dog lie.

By: interested 3rd party

interested 3rd party — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:06:55 +0000

You’ve strayed a wee bit off course, Dave. I sense your angry so until you wish to address my inquiry I’ll let you pout in peace.

By: Dave Staats

Dave Staats — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:56:48 +0000

When you add any qualifications,associate it with a body of work or back it up in any way, that might mean something, but I doubt it.

By: interested 3rd party

interested 3rd party — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:39:54 +0000

Not much behind your thoughts…again.

By: Dave Staats

Dave Staats — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:32:22 +0000

I know the other guy. We are now laughing at you offline as well. He has business reasons for needing to remain out of this by name. And he is not anonymous TO ME. So, yes, I would like to know who you are so I can see if you are a known idiot or a new one for my catalog. I don’t particularly care if you publicly attach yourself to your comments or not. Either way you should not return without some substance. I have to stop this and go make 6 million phone calls since I am not linked to them as friends already…

By: interested 3rd party

interested 3rd party — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:22:14 +0000

Dave,
Interesting how you don’t give You Know Me sh*t for “hiding behind his momma’s apron of anonymity”. Oh, yeah. He/she agrees with you. Thoughts?

By: You Know Me

You Know Me — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:12:16 +0000

Actually – I just had a pretty good idea. How about I outsource the actual phone calling to one of these “unbundled” firms? Isn’t that what the big guys are doing now?

There just has to be some other way to figure out which of my new network members wants a new job, right?

Oops. Scratch that. I guess I really want the “passive” people, eh? Rumor has it that once someone wants a new job that means they’re “active”, right? And active is bad, isn’t it? I hear so many things from our industry’s thought leaders its getting hard to keep track…..I mean, our “profession’s” thought leaders.

It use to be so much easier. Oh wait. It’s easier now. I think.