🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4o53k0$3rv@fugue.clari.net> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
>In article <DrpK9x.9Ao@ncube.com>, Mark Wiley <markw@ncube.com> wrote:
>>
>>Or it says that they like wearing a suit and tie (I don't, but tastes vary).
>>Or it says that nothing else was clean, or they wanted to show you that they
>>could look very presentable if they had to interface with customers.
>>Or etc., etc., etc.
>>
>>I can understand not giving them points for wearing a suit, but having it count
>>against them seems very unfair.
>
>Well, depends what you mean by "count against them."
>
>In reality what I mean is that the people who show up in casual clothes
>get a point *for* them, because they had the guts to come in and know
>they would impress with just their skill and not their appearance, or
>because they researched the company enough to know we're not a suit and
>tie company.   That's a point *for* the person in casual clothes.

Either they have guts, or perhaps they are just clueless about certain social graces,
or as I said before, they just like wearing suits.

Anyway, you can judge people anyway you want, but making any decision about a person
based on any superficial characteristic limits the pool you have to pick from, which is
not a good idea in my opinion.

>
>You can consider that a point against the person who shows up in the suit
>if you like.

Thanks, I will :-).

>
>You can usually tell right away that the person hardly ever wears a suit,
>too.

And so they made a special effort for you, but it doesn't count in their favor,
how sad.

I think at this point I will agree to disagree, and move on.

Have a happy ...

Markw