All X'0D' lost during reading line sequential file using microfocus se
in [Cobol]
|
From: Robert on 3 Aug 2008 22:19 On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:56:52 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: >In article <19v994510llhjjimheq9qclmmsp849j07s(a)4ax.com>, >Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >>On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:10:15 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: >>>Mr Wagner, you've made assertions about various 'worlds' in the past which >>>have been shown to have a curious relationship - or lack thereof - with >>>what others have experienced. >> >>I relate my experiences with Fortune 100 companies that are household >>names -- Wal-Mart, >>Coca-Cola, IBM, Merrill Lynch, Sears, Sprint, etc. If your mileage >>varies, kindly >>identify the venues where you found more enlightenment. > >On the Internet nobody knows you're a weenie-boy running at 1200 baud on >an Apple ][e... are you offering to play 'my resume's bigger than yours', >Mr Wagner? I named the companies in response to sceptics who say I'm describing atypical situations. > Consider, if you will, how different experiences can be for >different people working in different project area at each of the >companies you've mentioned... it's possible that someone has had the exact >same clients as you - or, of course, an equally Illustrious Set - and has >come to conclusions not in accord with your own. I describe my experiences; they can describe theirs. >(I interviewed at Merrill, years on back... somewhere in the Bowels of >Jersey, as I recall; they demanded an arrangement they called a >'professional day' Did you speak with an accent? They usually confine that scam to foreigners.
From: Anonymous on 4 Aug 2008 05:18 In article <d9oc94162hh7tu4iihne20lea41nt1qdjo(a)4ax.com>, Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:56:52 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: > >>In article <19v994510llhjjimheq9qclmmsp849j07s(a)4ax.com>, >>Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >>>On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:10:15 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: > >>>>Mr Wagner, you've made assertions about various 'worlds' in the past which >>>>have been shown to have a curious relationship - or lack thereof - with >>>>what others have experienced. >>> >>>I relate my experiences with Fortune 100 companies that are household >>>names -- Wal-Mart, >>>Coca-Cola, IBM, Merrill Lynch, Sears, Sprint, etc. If your mileage >>>varies, kindly >>>identify the venues where you found more enlightenment. >> >>On the Internet nobody knows you're a weenie-boy running at 1200 baud on >>an Apple ][e... are you offering to play 'my resume's bigger than yours', >>Mr Wagner? > >I named the companies in response to sceptics who say I'm describing >atypical situations. Mr Wagner, you were not said to be describing 'atypical situations', it was pointed out that your description of 'worlds' was not in accord with other folks' experiences. > >> Consider, if you will, how different experiences can be for >>different people working in different project area at each of the >>companies you've mentioned... it's possible that someone has had the exact >>same clients as you - or, of course, an equally Illustrious Set - and has >>come to conclusions not in accord with your own. > >I describe my experiences; they can describe theirs. They have... and they don't mention much about 'worlds', that I recall. > >>(I interviewed at Merrill, years on back... somewhere in the Bowels of >>Jersey, as I recall; they demanded an arrangement they called a >>'professional day' > >Did you speak with an accent? They usually confine that scam to foreigners. Some people say they hear me as doing such... but in the words of the Firesign Theatre, 'How can *I* know what *you* hear?' DD
From: Anonymous on 4 Aug 2008 05:34
In article <elgc94hm5hsif2dhcbgmntnufc2eju2pvr(a)4ax.com>, Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 14:20:40 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: > >>In article <oh5a94djujajtek423m6e7rui63bfjsip3(a)4ax.com>, >>Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >>> >> >>[snip] >> >>Mr Wagner and I seem to have remarkably similar experiences in this >>matter. >> >>>In my experience, getting a contractor job requires: >>> >>>.. Talking to 20 recruiters, convincing them you have ALL the requirements. >> >>First the recruiter must be caught, of course. One fires up one's email >>(it used to be a fax machine) and sends an updated copy of the brag-sheet >>to everyone there... > >Posting it on DICE and maybe Monster is more efficient. I prefer to deal with the people I've already dealt with, if only to make things easier on my references. Have you ever gotten a good hit from so public a posting? [snip] >>Then, after dealing with the 'pimples' (junior-level pimps) who have been >>assigned to 'New Contacts' ('Please, turn to page three and notice the >>date of that first technical certification... yes, that's right, the one >>that's before either of your parents were born. What were you asking >>about experience?') > >They want RECENT experience. It is generally thought that experience >more than ten years >ago is irrelevant. Some recruiters say five years. If what they were asking about had anything to do with the job I might understand that... but, at times, they're asking about something else entire, perhaps they are trying to see if I fit, precisely, into another jigsaw-puzzle they have. If they trot out the 'recent experience' saw I'll suggest that they sell it to the client differently... sometimes it works, sometimes no. [snip] >>and the requests for 'Hairy Ears' interviews: >> >>P: 'We'd like you to come in and talk to you about what Sell-ur-Assco is >>all about.' > >Some spend half their ad selling the contracting company, telling you >they're the largest, >fastest growing or have the highest level of certification. ALL Indian >companies are CMM >Level 5. They don't seem to know the difference between a worker and a client. My response is a simple 'I'm sure yours is a lovely company. Tell me, what would I do if my paycheck were not deposited to my account by our usually agreed-upon date?'... and I base further conversations on the reply. [snip] >>That's interesting... I *never* get Good News on a Friday, in fact I have >>the category of 'Friday Afternoon Look Busy' call just for when the pimps >>are making such. I've found that, in general, if I am not on site and >>working within 48 hours of the client receiving the fax/email of my papers >>then the slot is dead. > >That's the pimp's requirement, not the client's. The pimp is afraid >you'll get a better >offer. The same thing happened to me twice. > >-- Friday -- >Pimp: The client insists you be there at 8am sharp on Monday. >Me: OK, I'll have to drive all weekend , but I'll be there. >Pimp: Remember, 8am sharp. >--- Saturday, cell phone rings while driving -- >Pimp: How is the move going? >Me: I'm in Tulsa, should be in Overland Park Sunday afternoon. >Pimp: Uhhh .. it looks like the client won't be ready for you Monday. >Me: You told me they insisted on 8am sharp. You didn't make that up, did you? >Pimp: There's been a change. Now they want you Wednesday at 9:30. Me: 'Looks like you've promised them something they want but won't get. I'll be pulling over at the nearest Hourly Rates Motel and re-posting my availability. This 'change' is costing me money and I am not in business to do that. Please call the client on Monday and tell them to find someone else... oh, and take my bragsheet out of your database while you're at it; I don't see you as fulfilling the duties of an 'agent' and I see no reason why you should earn money from my billed hours as being one.' DD |