Re: Testing job applicants

[Brian Inglis <Brian.dot.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca>]

On Fri, 01 Oct 1999 05:40:37 GMT, seebs@plethora.net (Peter
Seebach) wrote:

>In article <37F4186F.CD98B06C@mail.newcastle.edu.au>,
>Adam Anderson  <aanderso@mail.newcastle.edu.au> wrote:
>>What if you so good at cheating that you can successfully do it in the real
>>world as well as in exams to the extent that your success rate is higher
>>than it would be if you had relied on actually learning the information.
>>Learning and cheating are both means. Its the result that will ALWAYS
>>count.
>
>Hypothetically, if no one ever knew, you'd do "well" - but projects you were
>involved with would still be worse off than projects you weren't, because
>there'd be one less person contributing.
>
>Anyway, for the most part, this ranks up there with "what if you invented
>a perpetual motion machine and had it do your homework".
>
>-s

Go hang around a large organization for a while. 
The Dilbert characters really exist and behave that way. 
Scott Adams based them on (hopefully) composites of real people
at PacBell, IIRC. 
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis 	Calgary, Alberta, Canada
-- 
Brian_Inglis@CSi.com 	(Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
				use address above to reply