Can Opener wrote
When we used to recruit at a large company where I worked, we asked our youngest team members to scan the social media accounts of the applicants for any obvious red flags before extending offers.
Was going to mention this quite some time back, am sorry I didn't. Your company certainly isn't the only one that checks social media for red flags on applicants, and this where the danger lies in allowing such stories without any kind of proof. Of course, eventually you realize some sites are just not reliable or trustworthy, but you have to hope that realization comes before it affects you or maybe your daughter.
Angus wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:30 pm
Can Opener wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:55 pm
I am part of the "sarcasm syndicate" on this issue and believe we have probably made our point --
You have? No, I think you can all be even more childish and petulant and shameless if you want. This has been the equivalent of a two-year-old having a temper tantrum, thrashing on the floor because mommy told him he couldn’t have a toy to play with anymore. What a pathetic comment on the state of things if your “sarcasm syndicate” is made up of adults and you’re acting like this because you didn’t get your own way after the administrator ruled on the initial posts.
Told him he couldn't have a toy? Rather sexist, particularly when posting on a wlax thread, no?
Actually, you're wrong. The intent was to show why some sort of censorship is needed, has nothing to do with "not getting your own way." You can see how quickly it goes downhill (maybe that's why LaxPower would delete hearsay stories with no proof of said story) and it will get worse when/if more people come aboard. Guess we made our point though, eh?