Was it the things she told me or the situation I was in? I was working with someone who, basically, should never have been hired into the job, and then should not have been kept as long as she was. She was entirely inadequate for the role we performed. I was a new graduate and so lucky to get a job in my field, pretty much right out of university. We worked in a small office of three. The third was a sales rep and out visiting clients most of the time. She was, more or less, my superior, though the company made it clear that she was not someone to emulate yet gave me no one else to look to for advice or guidance. She would constantly say "this place will leave you to sink or swim" (amongst other phrases, all along these lines). That's probably the worst saying ever, though I can't really consider it ridiculous because, frankly, I absolutely see why she would say that (for example, I met my manager once during my interview and then the next time was about four months into being hired that should tell you the level of support given). But I cannot even explain to you the way this statement biased me against this company and the job I was doing. I was lost and truly believed that I couldn't do any better (because I was sinking and couldn't figure out how to swim on my own). Yes, you may have issues in whatever job your in but to tell a newbie that they have to figure it out on their own that's pretty ridiculous. If this is something you hear or think and asking others for help or finding a supportive environment is not an option try replacing it with "learn to fly on the way down". At the very least, you won't have such a negative frame of mind. Question: What line would the boss say? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- This place will leave you to sink or swim
- Learn to fly on the way down
- not enough information
- You have to manage up
This place will leave you to sink or swim
--
Exciting news everyone, BIOeffect has now officially launched in Australia. The BIOeffect EGF serum is creating a huge storm world wide. It was first launched in Iceland last year (as it is made by the Icelandic company Sif Cosmetics) and within 6 months of the release it is estimated that 1 in 5 Icelandic women over the age of 30 have purchased the serum. When it was released in France, the serum sold out in the first week at the famous concept store in Paris, Colette. Now, we can finally get it here in Australia and I believe that it will be launching in the US shortly. The serum is highly scientific, and based on reviews around the world, it really appears to work. I have been using it for a week now and my angry line down the middle of my forehead is already seeming less angry. I will post a review once I have been using it for a month or so. If you want to purchase the serum, it is available from the BIOeffect Australia website or if you are looking for updates or reviews on the product then you can either like their Facebook page or follow them on Twitter. So, who is now busting to try the serum? Well, to celebrate the launch, the wonderful people behind BIOeffect Australia, Melanie and Kym, have agreed to sponsor a giveaway of some amazing BIOeffect products. First prize will be one full sized bottle of the amazing BIOeffect serum. This bottle alone is worth $180.00!! In addition there will be two runners up prizes of a 3ml travel sized bottle of the serum. These are worth $40.00 each! Entering the competition is simple. All you need to do is have a read of my article, The science behind the BIOeffect EGF Serum explained, and make a comment on that article about what excites you the most about the serum. Are you like me and are blown away by the science? Is it the fact that independent clinical trials are proving that the serum works? Or is there something else that has grabbed you? Please tell me. Question: What is it that is highly scientific? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- angry line
- not enough information
- serum
- forehead
serum
--
I ducked, Cerberus pounced, and Mr. Waciejowski screamed like a dying ferret--a soothing and pleasant sound under most other circumstances, but now only distracting. I felt the rush of air against my face as the crowbar skimmed my head. The man wielding it was in a black three-piece suit and built like a Texas linebacker. His mass seemed to bend space-time in the parking lot as he barreled down on me. All I could see was nearly seven feet of Armani silk. I stood upright and brought my knee into his groin and gave him a swift elbow in the small of his back and a fist to the base of his skull. Now, I wasn't the biggest guy in the world, but I certainly wasn't the smallest either. And I was also acutely aware of how much damage I could do to another human being. But this hulking mass in Italian finery didn't even seem phased. The blows I sent this guy should have dropped him like a bag of wet cement, but he just turned and hamstringed me with that damn crowbar. I fell so hard that one of my teeth chipped. The box flew out of my grip and landed just a few feet away. Out of the corner of my eye I could see Pete on the ground, fumbling with his cell phone while Cerberus mauled another suit trying to sneak up behind me. If the fall hadn't knocked the wind out of me, seeing Cerberus tear into this guy certainly would have. The dog was all fangs and fur, making sounds like construction machinery. Thick and heavy. The guy was screaming all kinds of nonsense as he kept his shredded arms in front of his face and neck. Blood and fabric flew about as the animal tossed its head in violent arcs. Question: The narrator belives === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- His opponent is weak
- His opponent is very strong
- not enough information
- His opponent is small
His opponent is very strong
--
Every so often I see a scenario play out that I find rather disappointing. It works like this: someone posts a topic to their blog that is critical or controversial. This person can either be a community member, commentator, employee or otherwise; it doesn't matter who the person is. Then what happens is a series of comments are posted to that blog entry from readers that are critical of the post, thus challenging the author on their views. The author then either deletes the blog entry or disables the comments based on the feedback. In other words, a viewpoint is shared, an invitation for comment is provided, but that invitation is then revoked when the author of the blog post is dissatisfied with the response from their readers. I have seen this happen countless times over the years and I don't like this. I believe we should all be accountable for our words. Our words have the ability to inspire, to entertain, to challenge, but to also hurt. Actions have consequences, and so do words. As such, when I see someone openly share their thoughts on their blog and invite their readers to provide comments, I see that as a wonderful demonstration of accountability and engagement; debate is a beautiful thing when executed with politeness and respect. To then close that door, seemingly because people disagree with you, is in my mind the equivalent of walking out of a room in the middle of a debate. The excuse when folks are criticized of this behavior is typically "it is my blog and I can run it how I like". This is true: it is your blog, and you can run it how you like, but the true measure of a person is not just in what they say, but also in the conversation and discourse that follows. Question: Who challenges the author on their views? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- readers
- community members
- other blog authors
- not enough information
readers
--