Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've done my part saying I'm not an expert. Please have some patience, and understand it's perfectly acceptable for the uninitiated to "you keep banging the same drum and have such a problem with what I'm saying that you're now parsing the examples I provided."
Now, what kind of academic backgrounds do you hire from? Maybe people with a public speaking background go over intense grammar instruction and are told "don't you dare use anyways instead of anyway" ... Yes, I can understand being so picky over anyway/anyways. I can also understand if they're English majors as they are supposed to know the finer points of the language.
But the "stressed importance" (not merely the grammar rule, but how seriously it's taken) of anyway/anyways in oral English is not English 101 (I say this from personal experience) and so this grammar instruction in regards to spoken language is NOT given at the university level to every major. People do take speech classes but I don't remember anyone being harped upon for using "anyways". That's why I'm so critical, because people from other backgrounds won't know that this is a "don't do this or you lose the chance of a job".
If you only hire people who are supposed to have public speaking backgrounds, though, please disregard!
As for me: you don't have to worry about me. I never applied to the type of job you are describing.
You state there is a stressed importance on anyway vs anyways, but the stressed importance is on correct grammar. You are the one fixated on the example of anyway vs. anyways.
I'm not surprised the grammar instruction is not given at the university level. They assume you know proper English by the time you get there. If you say 'ain't' in college, it's highly unlikely anyone will correct you, but that doesn't mean it's proper English. Unless you're referring to an English class or public speaking or speech class, basic grammar is not going to be addressed at the university level.
I've never stated people who say 'anyways' won't get a job. I've said they will not be hired in my department. Nobody on my team is involved with public speaking, but they are heavily involved in client contact. They are college graduates, but not English majors. Some have a masters degree. We have high standards. I cannot have someone on the phone with a client, or giving a client presentation, who doesn't speak like an adult. Adding the 's' is a natural tendency children have when they're still learning to speak properly. If you're still adding the 's' as an adult, you're going to sound like a child, and sounding like a child means you won't be taken seriously by our clients.
I'm in a highly competitive field trying to keep very important people happy. I'm a published author. Occasionally, I have speaking engagements. This isn't just a hang up, it's critical to everything I do.
Given the number of people who say 'anyways', I don't doubt that a lot of teachers let its usage go. Unfortunately, the quality of teachers has gone down dramatically from what it was forty years ago. I'm not indicting all teachers, but in general, the field no longer attracts the best of the best.
I've received a number of short, honest rejection emails and I actually appreciated them. In essence, they said, "You're not good enough," in 1 or 2 sentences. Contrast that to this email I got after a lengthy and cordial phone interview for position X with company Y:
For some reason, I find those types of emails to be rather soul-crushing, because I know it's a generic rejection email that is meant to sound individualized.
Anyone else feel the same way?
I would hate the ones where they don't tell you why you didn't get the job.
I would have a lot more respect for an employer if they say: "You didn't get the job because you didn't take Intermediate Programming." then "You didn't get the job because there were 100 candidates just like you."
Yes, we know that. That's the cause, not the reason.
He did a childish thing because he didn't get hired and the end result was that he's been charged with a crime, has two years of probation and nobody will hire him when they find out what a moron he is.
I'm not sure how sweet revenge is when you ruin your prospects in the process.
I can easily predict the day when it will be something far worse than cat poop
Oh, I can, too. There are some really sick people out there. Between things like this and posters defending a father leaving his child in a hot car only to die, there is no shortage of nuts.
When it's far worse than cat poop, the punishment will be far worse, too. I hope it includes time in a shrink's office where they can get some badly needed help.
He did a childish thing because he didn't get hired and the end result was that he's been charged with a crime, has two years of probation and nobody will hire him when they find out what a moron he is.
I'm not sure how sweet revenge is when you ruin your prospects in the process.
I agree it's childish, but I don't see why it's a crime. Feces looks nothing like an explosive.
The employer seems equally childish to file a lawsuit over something like that.
I agree it's childish, but I don't see why it's a crime. Feces looks nothing like an explosive.
The employer seems equally childish to file a lawsuit over something like that.
Where did the article say the employer filed a lawsuit? I may have missed it but I didn't read that.
It's a health hazard, so it's against the law to mail it. He could have gotten time in prison for doing that but the judge opted to just give hm two years probation.
It's a health hazard, so it's against the law to mail it. He could have gotten time in prison for doing that but the judge opted to just give hm two years probation.
He didn't get charged for sending the feces because it's a health hazard, but because he sent it for revenge.
I'm not sure what the state law is in Missouri, but according to the state law in Virginia, it's perfectly legal with "a lot of restrictions and guidelines that have to be followed."
..."I would like to know if its illegal to give someone you hate, a [C]hristmas present, containing dog feces?” the writer asks. “And can it be mailed?”
State police, though attempting to provide guidance, could provide no firm advice.
“Sending poop … probably constitutes the transport of hazardous materials through the mail,” says Tom Lambert, a legal specialist for the agency.
A fair assumption, but U.S. Postal Service spokeswoman Cathy Boule offers this advice for committed gift givers, loaded with such holiday cheer that they just can't hold it:
“The bottom line is, yes [poop] can be mailed, but there are a lot of restrictions and guidelines that have to be followed,” Boule says. “We have strict guidelines.”
Among those guidelines, mailers must declare their dookie, along with a reason for sticking a stamp on it. Revenge doesn't pass the postal service smell test. And it must be packaged properly. In other words, no flaming paper bags...
He didn't get charged for sending the feces because it's a health hazard, but because he sent it for revenge.
I'm not sure what the state law is in Missouri, but according to the state law in Virginia, it's perfectly legal with "a lot of restrictions and guidelines that have to be followed."
What a ridiculous statement. You obviously haven't read anything about this case.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.