Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site atux01.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!lll-crg!caip!atux01!perry
From: perry@atux01.UUCP (P. Kivolowitz)
Newsgroups: net.jobs
Subject: What Constitues A ``Good'' Net.Jobs Posting
Message-ID: <138@atux01.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-Jan-86 11:00:11 EST
Article-I.D.: atux01.138
Posted: Wed Jan  8 11:00:11 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Jan-86 06:11:03 EST
Organization: CSEd, AT&T Communications, Piscataway, N.J.
Lines: 29
Keywords: one person's opinion

As a person who has been employed in positions learned of through the net
I'd like to offer my opinion as to what makes net.jobs worth reading. The
thing I find most useful is that postings in net.jobs have been  specific
and detailed about one or a small number of real positions. After reading
a net.jobs posting I knew:

	who the position was with
	what qualifications were needed
	what the duties were
	what special attraction the position had to offer

	often the posting contains:

	salary range
	benifits

My problem with head hunters  is that  they  very often do not give the
information  as mentioned  above.  To ``protect''  themselves and their 
livelyhood a headhunter will keep  you in the  dark as to, for example,
who the client is. 

My feeling is that the best attribute of net.jobs is DETAILS. I wouldn't
care, in fact it would be to the advantage to the job seeking netters,
if headhunters were (in recognition that they are a guest in a national
forum of qualified individuals) to  write  net.jobs postings  NOT as they 
would write for a newspaper but, rather, in a fashion as described above.


Perry S. Kivolowitz