Re: Bad Fit?

Subject: Re: Bad Fit?
From: "Maggie Secara" <maggiros -at- hotmail -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 21:34:19 -0800

LOL, ok this one is the funniest. (And I have to deeply thank the vast
number of people who've replied off-list. I'll try to answer everyone before the weekend.)

No, I don't think a relative is involved. I do know the two other writers
complain desparately about being over-burdened and desparately needing
another writer. Hence, my being hired. I also know that... well, the other day, someone came in to
interview for another position, and it was discovered he had a
lot of experience as a copy writer. These two writers (who had interviewed
me) were asked to chat him up. Afterwards, they were all excited at the
possibility of a 4th writer on the team, especially with those particular skills.

It's not impossible that this is where budget came into play. They were
cleared for a 3rd writer but not a 4th? His skills were more glamorous than mine, I guess. The ad copy for this company does need some help, but my impression was that if you don't write it as the CEO would himself, forget it. Maybe he would listen to someone who ... uhm ... or maybe not.

If said interviewee is on the list, please don't take this personally! I never met you, and it's not your fault. Just be wary.

The phone's been ringing since Tuesday afternoon, so I'm not all that
worried, although I'll have to be very thrifty for a few weeks. I'm writing off this week as "taking an Intro to FrameMaker class". Not lying, just putting a spin on it. :)

Thanks again everyone for your insights on and off list.

Maggie Secara

~My principle is this: 1. Do what thou wilt as long as it's funny. And yeah, I decide what's funny.

>From: iluvvscotties -at- earthlink -dot- net
>Reply-To: iluvvscotties -at- earthlink -dot- net
>To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
>Subject: Re: Bad Fit?
>Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 16:30:40 -0500
>At 12:55 PM 02/01/2001 -0800, Elna Tymes wrote:
>>Here are some other possible explanations:
>>2. Someone who got interviewed about the same
>>time you did, and wound up being a preferable hiree,
>>became available after you accepted the offer.
>*AND*, this little treasure may have been the child of a board member or
>VIP client ... you know, the kind colleagues are instructed to give an
>important position and fancy title with no overtime and abolutely,
>positively *NO* responsibility if anything goes wrong (including as a
>result of his or her actions).
>Oh, the joys of working with such a hiree -- NOT!

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

Develop HTML-Based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver 4 ($100 STC Discount)
**WEST COAST LOCATIONS** San Jose (Mar 1-2), San Francisco (Apr 16-17) or 800-646-9989.

Sponsored by DigiPub Solutions Corp, producers of PDF 2001 Conference East, June 4-5, Baltimore/Washington D.C. area. or toll-free 877/278-2131.
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: RE: Telecommuting (unforeseen benefit of)
Next by Author: RE: Teleproductivity
Previous by Thread: re: bad fit?
Next by Thread: RE: Bad Fit?

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads