On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Levi Pearson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > TL;DR Not a good interview, mostly a puff piece that lets Lennart > > rehash stuff he has already said in blogs, Google+ posts, etc. A few > > interesting points, but not very good overall. > > It seems you didn't like it because it didn't really address your > concerns, and you felt that the interviewer ought to have shared your > concerns. That's fine, but not really an objective criticism of the > interview. I hope I've been able to address some of your concerns, or > at least draw out a more descriptive statement of what they are. > > > From context it seemed more to me that he was complaining about it as an interview, not about the content or views expressed. Ostensibly it from his review points it WAS a bad interview, where the interviewer didn't hold his interviewee to task or behave as conversation master at all. The fact that it wasn't what he wanted it to be in content might color that evaluation, but it is still accurate in that light (again, assuming I'm interpreting this correctly). -Tod Hansmann /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
