Using Your Photo As An Avatar - page 5
by Ruby Vee
I see more and more posters using their own photos as avatars, and while most of those pictures are very attractive, I think it's a dangerous practice. The internet isn't really as anonymous as we all like to think it is, but if... Read More
- 0Feb 19, '13 by aei631Brandon, you can change your username once every 180 days if you want to change it..
I am very careful about what I say about my employer(i would never identify the name) even when I have a gripe. It's got less to do with them seeing it because usually my gripes at work are minor and I address it at work (such as scheduling) but more because you always see on the news when there is an article about a nurse, no matter whether what she did is related to nursing or not, you always see them pull their facebook posts and social media sites!! So you won't ever see me 'check in' at work on my facebook, or post 'man i dont want to work today!' or really anything I wouldnt want my employer to see! There are no pictures of me doing anything I wouldnt do in uniform. Thats just good practice to not broadcast your lesser qualities to the internet. My page is "private" but I am well aware that nothing is private online. So I just try to be the person online that I want other people to see me as...
- 1Feb 19, '13 by Enthused RNQuote from kloneLOL! Because it's an avatar! Mine is a sexy Mila Kunis and I am not at all ashamed of it! I think it's a very pretty picture of her.What I don't understand is why a person would use a picture of Angelina Jolie or some other sexy famous person as their av. Seems weird.
- 0Feb 20, '13 by anotheronei read an article once on employers that are skeptical and skip over candidates they cant find on facebook, linkedin , etc as they think these people "have something to hide"... lol. it is getting to the point where i feel like people judge me very negatively for not being so open .
- 1Feb 20, '13 by samadams8Quote from anotheroneI think Linkedin is probably OK, b/c all you put on there is professionally related stuff. FB is a host of other stuff, and people can't assume that someone has something to hide by not using it. I am a private person. If I want you to know about my family events, pics, children, husband, great-granny, whatever, I will share with those whom I interact personally and directly.i read an article once on employers that are skeptical and skip over candidates they cant find on facebook, linkedin , etc as they think these people "have something to hide"... lol. it is getting to the point where i feel like people judge me very negatively for not being so open .
A lot of people do not feel the need to post their lives for potentially open consumption--there are clearly ways this is done and then violated--all so that Zuckerberg can keep getting wealthier.
If a potential employer is not going to hire me b/c I don't use FB or some sort of SM, that's on them. What people don't truly seem to grasp is that you do your due diligence to hire someone safe, effective, and optimal for the position, and that's fine. But you still will NEVER know what that translates to until you actually hire and work with them, period. You will never eliminate anything other than major (glaring) red flags. And we all know there are those without red flags that are capable of things we would never have imagined. Usually the wackadoodles are those that want the attention and post all their ridiculous junk on social media. So in terms of elimination, these folks make it easy for HR in terms of hiring. LOL. But the other side of that is ridiculous. No one can assume or should assume or is being intelligent in assuming they are can't hire someone for lack of social media participation. LOLOLOL That's like assuming someone does not believe in God because she/he don't attend church, or that someone in fact does believe in God b/c he/she do attend church. I mean we all know what happens when you ASSume.
I know darn well I have nothing to hide; but my private life, as soporific as it may seem to some, especially in light of some other peoples', is still my private life.
And for the record, the five minutes in total that I've ever watched the Kardashians, it did not leave me to believe their lives were even remotely interesting, entertaining, or even somehow relevant to real life. Just saying, b/c people are obsessed with reality tv shows, and it's very strange to me how we love being a culture of, well, voyeurs of sorts--I guess social media can tend to play into that kind of thing.
Personally, I could care less what the Real Housewives of Whatever City are carrying on about this or any other week. Just like the Kardashians, it's nonsense to me. So I am quite sure my life would be incredibly boring to someone else peeling through FB. It's like this for me. I know and am good with the fact I am alive on planet Earth. I don't have to display it on a social media site in order to feel validated about it. That just sums it up for me. Others can do as they please.
Oh, I will make an exception to the reality tv thing. Every once and a while I watch the Duck Dynasty people, just b/c I think they are a bit more like real people, and they are kind of cooky without being utterly obnoxious.
At any rate, as far as I know, certain things are still provided for under the US Constitution:
(Privacy of Beliefs)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
(Privacy of the Home)
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
(Privacy of the Person and Possessions)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
(More General Protection for Privacy?)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Liberty Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
No State shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law.
So, again I say, if someone is going to bypass me as a potential employee for not having a FB page, lol, I don't think I want to work for them anyway, b/c they clearly do not have a sound understanding, appreciation, and/or respect for the Constitution.Last edit by samadams8 on Feb 20, '13 : Reason: and one more thing, lol
- 2Feb 20, '13 by Nascar nurseQuote from DeLanaHarvickWannabeoop:.....got myself in deep on this one! Guess this is why you should never reveal your true self.Well, Danica...DeLana Harvick here. (See, to your left, picture of me, hubby and baby son).
I have many many MANY bones to pick with you, Ms. Patrick...firstly, how does it feel to be with a fulltime ride only because of the sponsorship money you can bring in, and how does it feel to know that Johanna Long has crappy equipment yet regularly finishes higher than you do in the Nationwide series?
See, this is another reason why this should remain anonymous.
PS: I'm not a Danica fan in real life - it just happened to be most relevant at the time. (Go Kasey Kahne)