On 5/3/2011 12:54 PM, Ryan Simpkins wrote: > Over the last couple of years I've been maintaining a somewhat loose "No > Recruiters" policy for things like the LinkedIN group and web site. The number > of recruiters requesting to join seems to be accelerating. Would anyone like > to put forth reasoned arguments for/against allowing recruiters to participate > in PLUG services? Their intention is obvious. They want to communicate job > opportunities and identify individual targets to cold call. They tend to call > you at work and home during and outside business hours. > > /Yes/No/Qualified Yes/Qualified No/ > > -Ryan > > FWIW - To be clear, I vote "NO!" One called me at 8am after a particularly > rough night of on-call work. It was not amusing. However, I thought it might > be good to gather other opinions. > > /* > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > Don't fear the penguin. > */ Qualified No. While their intention is known, the handpicking of names from the list from those that may / may not wish to entertain new opportunities will happen and those of us uninterested in the opportunities will be subject to the undesired solicitation.
The idea of a plug-jobs list has merit as we can then jump on and off as desired. This then allows recruiters, and others in the group, to post opportunities at a steady flow. It would also be helpful to outline what the group considers a standard data set / post format for such opportunities. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
