On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 09:22:26 +1100, "colsul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Read the request closely as answering newsgroup queries without > understanding what is said can make you look, no, confirm you are stupid. In Sensitivity-group country, we try to say (if confrontation is necessary) that an *action* is stupid or poorly considered, not that a person is stupid. (That is usually enough to make one's point... without getting embarrassed by over-ambitious flaming) In sci.stat.edu, we usually post the content that we are replying to, before we add comments; and we might criticize in some fashion, but we would never call a regular post-er 'stupid', who has offered dozens or hundreds of useful comments in the past. Before posting to a particular Internet group, it is well-advised to read a number of posts there, to pick up on the acceptable content and style. Besides all that, I have to say: from what I made of your question, I agree 100% with Glen's response. He gave a (relatively) gentle warning about a course of action. As a matter of fact, I find it hard to *imagine* cramming (which you ask about) for a job interview, unless it was following the advice, 'Learn about the job/ company.' But that's not something to look up in a textbook. -- Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =================================================================
