Remember that Matthew Alan Todd guy? And let's debate about giving people a chance.

[Aaron]

If you suck dick with the same passion as you have when debating worthless shit sign me up for a blowjob.

 

Page 4

[kirks5oh]

First impression in real life? absolutely

 

First impression on the internet? you must be joking.

 

feel sorry that you deal only in absolutes, amused by your frustration and resistance to the concept that nothing is absolute.

 

But I am convinced there is no such thing as interesting debate on this board and little regard for free thought. So at this point I just keep it lively, maybe waiting to see if someone else feels the need to respond and see what kind of legs this place has.

 

the internet is written in pen, bro.

 

if you think you can't be fired or hired based on your facebook page, you're in need of a reality check.

[Snowflake]

I don't understand where he said this was an experiment?

[Snowflake]

If this is going to end with my dick in this guys mouth I like this experiment

[Littleguy]

I'm amazed you even lower yourself to posting on here.

 

I'm not sure why you would bring me up all of the sudden, but thanks. :marc:

[Chadz89GTA]

If this is going to end with my dick in this guys mouth I like this experiment

 

In for pix

[pontiacfreak142]

First impression in real life? absolutely

 

First impression on the internet? you must be joking.

 

feel sorry that you deal only in absolutes, amused by your frustration and resistance to the concept that nothing is absolute.

 

But I am convinced there is no such thing as interesting debate on this board and little regard for free thought. So at this point I just keep it lively, maybe waiting to see if someone else feels the need to respond and see what kind of legs this place has.

 

while i will agree with you that in most cases, judging some one by their internet personality isnt the best idea, there are exceptions, and this douche (matthew) is one of them. He was given multiple chances to quit acting like a massive douche and get with it, but nothing ever changed.

 

I dont think anyone is doubting that there COULD be more to the story, but knowing what we do about said douche, we just dont doubt that it also could have happend just as described.

[LJ]

Hmm yes, shallow and pedantic

[Otis Nice]

Here's his Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/todd.allen.121/photos

 

:lolguy:

 

Directly from his own FB:

 

 

You seem to be a passionate person. I can respect that. I just haven't budgeted the time to continue this with you.

 

Made me :lolguy:

 

i believe the first impression is everything. i have a limited amount of time to invest in giving people 1000 chances to not be a fucking douche. my opinion of him is concrete. you comment that you feel sorry for me, yet find me amusing? :dumb: there's a difference between free thought, interesting debate, and just disagreeing to hear yourself talk/try to be smart/edgy/etc

 

http://img.pandawhale.com/164311-dave-chappelle-drop-the-mic-gi-LgAY.gif

 

Oh it probably will, Doc. you can only poke a bear so long before it wakes up and rips your face off.

 

I'm getting kind of bored of it though. I have all the info I needed from this little experiment anyway.

 

[Geeto67]

the internet is written in pen, bro.

 

if you think you can't be fired or hired based on your facebook page, you're in need of a reality check.

 

you absolutely can, however most (as in all) won't hire you based solely on your Facebook page, and while they might fire you for something on your Facebook page the first impression is long gone. Internet is rarely ever a stand alone. You mentioned this in the context of first impressions and really first impressions begin with a handshake.

[Dafunk13]

first impressions begin with a handshake.

 

 

Or with me Googling the shit out of your name and checking social media presence before I even bother calling you for an interview.

[Geeto67]

Or with me Googling the shit out of your name and checking social media presence before I even bother calling you for an interview.

 

And when does that happen exactly? If you work for a large corporation they will do it after the interview, because 1) it's easier to background check a small pool than every applicant, 2) you have to consent to a background check and most outsource that function because they will get extra measures like confirmation via IP address and other things "just googling" doesn't provide.

 

If you are a small company? then you do it whenever but considering the error rate and the likelihood of false positives it is a lot easier to meet the person first, get their consent, then google, then if you really want to hire them follow up regarding things on the web. However, plenty of HR professionals will tell you that while it is a "best practice" it is not to be relied on because it is not verifiable information.

 

And that is just social media, usually forums offer a level of anonymity that social media doesn't. Often companies won't even look at that info unless there is something highly inflammatory and more than a spurious connection.

 

Is there anything preventing you from jumping to a conclusion about internet data? no. But even the professionals will tell you it is best done after the interview.

[coltboostin]

And when does that happen exactly? If you work for a large corporation they will do it after the interview, because 1) it's easier to background check a small pool than every applicant, 2) you have to consent to a background check and most outsource that function because they will get extra measures like confirmation via IP address and other things "just googling" doesn't provide.

 

If you are a small company? then you do it whenever but considering the error rate and the likelihood of false positives it is a lot easier to meet the person first, get their consent, then google, then if you really want to hire them follow up regarding things on the web. However, plenty of HR professionals will tell you that while it is a "best practice" it is not to be relied on because it is not verifiable information.

 

And that is just social media, usually forums offer a level of anonymity that social media doesn't. Often companies won't even look at that info unless there is something highly inflammatory and more than a spurious connection.

 

Is there anything preventing you from jumping to a conclusion about internet data? no. But even the professionals will tell you it is best done after the interview.

 

 

I am one on the managers that deals with hiring (sales) for my company 400 or so employees at corporate, about 1000 Nationwide. sales floor at corp is 80-90 deep and is a high energy floor.

 

I can tell you we look at social media before ANY interview, unless the first interview was at a job fair. Ohio is an at-will state, and really we can hire and fire for whatever reason we please. So can anyone.

 

We are here to make money, not make friends. We also hire every person with the goal of having them as a long term asset to the company, not just a seat filler. It takes 4-6 months to get someone trained, licensed, and working to capacity all of which costs money, and we pay them a nice salary to listen, learn, and test. Thats a LOT of time and money wasted if they don't work out. We don't want people with baggage, or potential HR issues on our floor. Also, due to licensing requirements, no felonies, no prosecution for anything related to theft or fraud...ect. the 5 minutes of screening we do saves a lot of wasted time and money on people who wouldn't work out in the long run.

[Jewtoys]

I am one on the managers that deals with hiring (sales) for my company 400 or so employees at corporate, about 1000 Nationwide. sales floor at corp is 80-90 deep and is a high energy floor.

 

I can tell you we look at social media before ANY interview, unless the first interview was at a job fair. Ohio is an at-will state, and really we can hire and fire for whatever reason we please. So can anyone.

 

We are here to make money, not make friends. We also hire every person with the goal of having them as a long term asset to the company, not just a seat filler. It takes 4-6 months to get someone trained, licensed, and working to capacity all of which costs money, and we pay them a nice salary to listen, learn, and test. Thats a LOT of time and money wasted if they don't work out. We don't want people with baggage, or potential HR issues on our floor. Also, due to licensing requirements, no felonies, no prosecution for anything related to theft or fraud...ect. the 5 minutes of screening we do saves a lot of wasted time and money on people who wouldn't work out in the long run.

 

I do the same exact thing, research the hell out of the person online before I even met them for a interview. Easy way to weed through shit

[Geeto67]

I am one on the managers that deals with hiring (sales) for my company 400 or so employees at corporate, about 1000 Nationwide. sales floor at corp is 80-90 deep and is a high energy floor.

 

I can tell you we look at social media before ANY interview, unless the first interview was at a job fair. Ohio is an at-will state, and really we can hire and fire for whatever reason we please. So can anyone.

 

We are here to make money, not make friends. We also hire every person with the goal of having them as a long term asset to the company, not just a seat filler. It takes 4-6 months to get someone trained, licensed, and working to capacity all of which costs money, and we pay them a nice salary to listen, learn, and test. Thats a LOT of time and money wasted if they don't work out. We don't want people with baggage, or potential HR issues on our floor. Also, due to licensing requirements, no felonies, no prosecution for anything related to theft or fraud...ect. the 5 minutes of screening we do saves a lot of wasted time and money on people who wouldn't work out in the long run.

 

Good information there. This area has been a minor battle ground in the last couple years as people and companies find out that doing searches like this without consent or basing employment decisions on certain things found on these sites can run afoul of state restrictions as well as certain federal anti-discrimination statutes. I can't speak to Ohio but I know it was a bigger issue in NY.

[LJ]

Good information there. This area has been a minor battle ground in the last couple years as people and companies find out that doing searches like this without consent or basing employment decisions on certain things found on these sites can run afoul of state restrictions as well as certain federal anti-discrimination statutes. I can't speak to Ohio but I know it was a bigger issue in NY.

 

Searching someone on the internet does not run afoul of anything. It's where they were asking candidates to give them their social media PASSWORDS that was an issue.

[coltboostin]

Good information there. This area has been a minor battle ground in the last couple years as people and companies find out that doing searches like this without consent or basing employment decisions on certain things found on these sites can run afoul of state restrictions as well as certain federal anti-discrimination statutes. I can't speak to Ohio but I know it was a bigger issue in NY.

 

I don't disagree. With evidence an attorney can try to sue for anything these days, but its like anything else-prove it!

 

If I don't ask for a second interview, I never say why (really, HR makes that call anyways) but its not like I say "He had a post on his was saying "smoke weed ereday" on 4:20, I'm all set on this guy" and that gets relayed to the applicant.

[ImUrOBGYN]

I've noticed there's an assumption here that everyone's persona on the internet is not to be trusted or is not representative of their offline personas. This is simply not always the case. I, for one, represent myself no differently than I do "offline". I'm also make it a point not to run my mouth online about anything I won't say "offline".

 

Also, I don't think people are all that different than their online personas. If you're an asshole in one aspect in your life, am I supposed to believe that you've suddenly changed your ways when you're offline? That's a ridiculous notion to me. I'm not saying people don't take some liberties when they're online - it's their little "safe place". However, this actually increases the internet's worth at predicting someone's behavior and gives greater insight to their inner workings. This is my unprofessional, yet experienced opinion.

[Miller]

I've noticed there's an assumption here that everyone's persona on the internet is not to be trusted or is not representative of their offline personas. This is simply not always the case. I, for one, represent myself no differently than I do "offline". I'm also make it a point not to run my mouth online about anything I won't say "offline".

 

Also, I don't think people are all that different than their online personas. If you're an asshole in one aspect in your life, am I supposed to believe that you've suddenly changed your ways when you're offline? That's a ridiculous notion to me. I'm not saying people don't take some liberties when they're online - it's their little "safe place". However, this actually increases the internet's worth at predicting someone's behavior and gives greater insight to their inner workings. This is my unprofessional, yet experienced opinion.

 

Well said.

[Geeto67]

I don't disagree. With evidence an attorney can try to sue for anything these days, but its like anything else-prove it!

 

Hence why it is often better to have the search done after the initial weeding out and not to place as much weight. This way if the suit is filed it looks like a variety of information was used in making the employment decision and not only one thing. But everyone's industry is different. I can only speak to the financial and legal industries which usually do these after an interview has been scheduled.

 

The problem with internet information is it is not "work related" information or information gathered in a work context (like a reference or a recommendation) but rather personal or character information which can run into protected classes under discrimination statues pretty easily. With employment discrimination it is the employer who has the main burden of proof to show that it didn't happen - with Title VII and ADEA all the plaintiff has to prove is that it is possible, which is really easy when you consider social media often discloses race, age, religion, gender, etc.

[Geeto67]

 

Also, I don't think people are all that different than their online personas. If you're an asshole in one aspect in your life, am I supposed to believe that you've suddenly changed your ways when you're offline? That's a ridiculous notion to me. I'm not saying people don't take some liberties when they're online - it's their little "safe place". However, this actually increases the internet's worth at predicting someone's behavior and gives greater insight to their inner workings. This is my unprofessional, yet experienced opinion.

 

Don't underestimate the power of anonymity. There are plenty of people out there who are perfectly normal, well adjusted human beings who don't really register the internet as being real and say some of the most awful shit in that space.

 

for the sake of this board I hope you are wrong, based on the sheer volume of homophobia, mild racism, and misogyny I see on this board regularly. I am sure it isn't even intentional and probably those people are perfectly nice in person but still....it's not hard to find.

 

As far as internet tone - well it is really hard to read tone on the internet, and it is mostly done by the reader not the writer. You never know how people are going to interpret things.

[LJ]

Hence why it is often better to have the search done after the initial weeding out and not to place as much weight. This way if the suit is filed it looks like a variety of information was used in making the employment decision and not only one thing. But everyone's industry is different. I can only speak to the financial and legal industries which usually do these after an interview has been scheduled.

 

The problem with internet information is it is not "work related" information or information gathered in a work context (like a reference or a recommendation) but rather personal or character information which can run into protected classes under discrimination statues pretty easily. With employment discrimination it is the employer who has the main burden of proof to show that it didn't happen - with Title VII and ADEA all the plaintiff has to prove is that it is possible, which is really easy when you consider social media often discloses race, age, religion, gender, etc.

 

That's why in those long paragraphs before you "agree and submit" it will say things like "by submitting this application you agree to a background check that may include review of publicly available data including social media". Then if they find something in your social media that disqualifies you, they have to document it (ie "picture of applicant smoking crack).

[Geeto67]

That's why in those long paragraphs before you "agree and submit" it will say things like "by submitting this application you agree to a background check that may include review of publicly available data including social media". Then if they find something in your social media that disqualifies you, they have to document it (ie "picture of applicant smoking crack).

 

completely agree.

[Snowflake]

I've noticed there's an assumption here that everyone's persona on the internet is not to be trusted or is not representative of their offline personas. This is simply not always the case. I, for one, represent myself no differently than I do "offline". I'm also make it a point not to run my mouth online about anything I won't say "offline".

 

Also, I don't think people are all that different than their online personas. If you're an asshole in one aspect in your life, am I supposed to believe that you've suddenly changed your ways when you're offline? That's a ridiculous notion to me. I'm not saying people don't take some liberties when they're online - it's their little "safe place". However, this actually increases the internet's worth at predicting someone's behavior and gives greater insight to their inner workings. This is my unprofessional, yet experienced opinion.

 

Somebody start a goddamn slow clap already....please

 

 

If you know me, you know I am 100% in person who I am online....I'm a fucking snuggle bunny

[Geeto67]

If you know me, you know I am 100% in person who I am online....I'm a fucking snuggle bunny

 

That's so sad.