Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

RE: New jobs section

by muppetBoy (Pilgrim)
on Jun 02, 2000 at 17:13 UTC ( #16007=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to New jobs section

It is the first time I've noticed open recruiting on the site (Perl Jobs - the AM one, although the other is relevant as well, I guess) and I think its a bad direction for things to go in.
This has been discussed before in Employment Status, and I'm sure elsewhere as well.
IMHO, I think a jobs section should be created where people can look at these sort of posts if they want to (perhaps only visible via an option on the home node?). I don't really think that this is the correct forum for that sort of thing, but by creating an area for it the rest of the site will hopefully not be 'contaminated' by recruiters.


Comment on RE: New jobs section
RE: RE: New jobs section
by jjhorner (Hermit) on Jun 02, 2000 at 17:23 UTC

    That was my point. If we are going to allow it, it needs to be in a section of its own. I am not particularly interested in coming here and having to wade through job posts to get to the perl data.

    J. J. Horner
    Linux, Perl, Apache, Stronghold, Unix
    jhorner@knoxlug.org http://www.knoxlug.org/
    
      I agree, but the details of the implementation would be rather sticky. It would require a lot
      of monitoring by Vroom and others to make sure that there isn't any abuse. I'm not quite sure
      that is something that we can do right now. We can't just yank all posts with job in the title
      because a while ago I posted a question in Perl Monks Discussion asking for tips on finding a
      Perl job. So I don't know, maybe I am the start of this. :)
        I agree, but the details of the implementation would be rather sticky. It would require a lot of monitoring by Vroom and others to make sure that there isn't any abuse.

        Well, there are a great many people with moderating privileges on this site :) Really though a job posting in the wrong area is off-topic enough to get moderated down, while one in a jobs section can get moderated up if the person is detailed (o'Reilly posts a job offering, gets moderated up to 30 :) )

        Certainly the system isn't perfect, but it should work well enough. "Controlled chaos".

RE:(2) New jobs section
by swiftone (Curate) on Jun 02, 2000 at 18:00 UTC
    I don't have anything to add here, but wanted to add my voice.

    I certainly think it should be allowed (if for no other reason than it will happen anyway :) ). It will work best if given it's own section. Vroom, since you aren't an employment site, I'm not worried about functionality. If they want a job database, there are lots of sites that do that. I'm thinking just a place where they can drop their message, and refer to it.

      But do not allow the normal [ ] linking tricks to work. I would be concerned about people posting "answers" to questions that were merely links to their job posting.

      Actually, would it be useful to make posting to the Jobs board unavailable to AMs? If you are going to post a job offer, then you must at least go through the steps of creating a user account.

      Mik
      mikfire

        But do not allow the normal linking tricks to work.

        Actually, that doesn't bother me. I can think of (a few) cases where this would be relevant. More importantly, you can't really keep them from linking anyway (HREF's would still work). I don't mind someone in a thread about writing a DBD module saying "There's a relevant job notice at [Jobs: Bob]" To me that's a different creature than a job listing, and someone looking over your shoulder shouldn't think you are job hunting.

        Now in many cases it WOULDN'T be appropriate, but a lot of things aren't appropriate, and that the point of the moderating.

        Actually, would it be useful to make posting to the Jobs board unavailable to AMs? If you are going to post a job offer, then you must at least go through the steps of creating a user account.

        That initially makes sense to me, but again we have the concern that they could always post out of section as an AM. I'm willing to say that they should be allowed to post AM, since if they don't have a regular acccount here, but make one, people might /msg them and so forth expecting answers, or perhaps bug them in the chatterbox.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://16007]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others imbibing at the Monastery: (14)
As of 2014-10-22 06:56 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    For retirement, I am banking on:










    Results (114 votes), past polls