JOB WANTED - Field Social Work
Richard Lusted
Qualified social worker requires job in London or Bristol area,
specialise in Children with disabilities.
Please contact Beverley Jones on tel. 0181 993 2892 or email below.
--
Richard Lusted
Network Media ( Europe)Ltd
P.O.Box 38
Weston-s-Mare
Somerset,BS24 OBF.
44 (0) 1934 811600
44 (0) 1934 811700
r...@networkmedia.co.uk
http://www.networkmedia.co.uk
Mark Lewis
Richard Lusted <networ...@networkmedia.co.uk> wrote:
> Qualified social worker requires job in London or Bristol area,
> specialise in Children with disabilities.
> Please contact Beverley Jones on tel. 0181...
If Beverley Jones is a net citizen, why does she not make the post
herself? If she is not, why should civilised people consider employing
her?
--
Mark W. Lewis, Bristol(UK)
peri...@dial.pipex.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/pericles/
Richard Lusted
In article <34D06BB7...@dial.pipex.com>, Mark Lewis
<peri...@dial.pipex.com> writes
>Richard Lusted <networ...@networkmedia.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Qualified social worker requires job in London or Bristol area,
>> specialise in Children with disabilities.
>> Please contact Beverley Jones on tel. 0181...
>
>If Beverley Jones is a net citizen, why does she not make the post
>herself? If she is not, why should civilised people consider employing
>her?
>
accomodate her ?
Mark Lewis
Richard Lusted <networ...@networkmedia.co.uk> wrote:
> We are looking for uncivilised people to give her a job maybe you can
> accomodate her ?
I'm afraid not. The Pneumatic Institute requires all potential employees
to display good literacy skills (accomodate /accommodate).
Also, to be a 'social worker', one must surely first be a member of the
society in question; in the present environment that would mean someone
who leads a public life via the online media.
As far as 'children with disabilities' are concerned; in an information
society physical handicap is not really much of a disability: such
children will best be helped by someone who has that perspective and can
use the net to explore the opportunities the world has to offer them.
The word 'civilised' has as its origin simply 'living in cities', but it
can be taken to mean behaving in a manner, and holding values,
appropriate to contemporary society: In the present circumstances I
think that implies someone who uses the web and newsgroups to make
public their moral beliefs and political opinions and who holds values
appropriate to that situation: For example, they will believe in the
right to free speech because they wish to speak freely themselves.
How would you define 'civilised', Mr Lusted?
You may feel that you are doing Beverley Jones a favour by posting her
jobs.wanted ad: if you used your own web space, you might be right; but
here it is a favour at our expense, not yours. In general, newsgroups
only tolerate small-ads from regular contributors.
Suzy Hall
Richard Lusted wrote:
> In article <34D06BB7...@dial.pipex.com>, Mark Lewis
> <peri...@dial.pipex.com> writes
> >Richard Lusted <networ...@networkmedia.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Qualified social worker requires job in London or Bristol area,
> >> specialise in Children with disabilities.
> >> Please contact Beverley Jones on tel. 0181...
> >
> >If Beverley Jones is a net citizen, why does she not make the post
> >herself? If she is not, why should civilised people consider employing
> >her?
> >
> We are looking for uncivilised people to give her a job maybe you can
> accomodate her ?
"We"?? It does not speak well of Ms. Jones that a plurality of unknown
individuals is seeking to find work for her.
As someone who has responsibility for the recruitment, and vetting, of
social work staff I have to comment that this is a curious and somewhat
doubtful manner of researching current vacancies (particularly those which
involve substantial access to children).
I suggest Ms. Jones gets the current vacancy list from those Local
Authorities that she would wish to apply to, or reads ther current issues of
Community Care.
Suze
Richard Lusted
In article <34D47A28...@dial.pipex.com>, Mark Lewis
<peri...@dial.pipex.com> writes
>Richard Lusted <networ...@networkmedia.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> We are looking for uncivilised people to give her a job maybe you can
>> accomodate her ?
>
>to display good literacy skills (accomodate /accommodate).
>
>Also, to be a 'social worker', one must surely first be a member of the
>society in question; in the present environment that would mean someone
>who leads a public life via the online media.
>
>As far as 'children with disabilities' are concerned; in an information
>society physical handicap is not really much of a disability: such
>children will best be helped by someone who has that perspective and can
>use the net to explore the opportunities the world has to offer them.
>
>The word 'civilised' has as its origin simply 'living in cities', but it
>can be taken to mean behaving in a manner, and holding values,
>appropriate to contemporary society: In the present circumstances I
>think that implies someone who uses the web and newsgroups to make
>public their moral beliefs and political opinions and who holds values
>appropriate to that situation: For example, they will believe in the
>right to free speech because they wish to speak freely themselves.
>
>How would you define 'civilised', Mr Lusted?
>
>You may feel that you are doing Beverley Jones a favour by posting her
>jobs.wanted ad: if you used your own web space, you might be right; but
>here it is a favour at our expense, not yours. In general, newsgroups
>only tolerate small-ads from regular contributors.
>
myself and others. What the heavens did you do prior to the introduction
of the Internet to bore the socks off everyone ? Beverly a friend is
desparetely looking for a job in her area - field social work and we
really don't need your inane comments. Why can't you stick to responding
to postings which are of genuine interest to you and your mentality ?
You act as if you own the Internet and continue to criticise all manner
of people and postings on a regular basis. Before you say post in jobs
section there is no job section for the above and for heavens sake the
poor girl wants a job. Advertising as such rather than inane jokes and
comments in poor taste seems to me a much better use of this fantastic
medium.
After your long winded reply which will undoubtedly come and need
someone from the planet Zog to translate and understand, i will ignore
and not respond to your critical postings again, so don't waste to much
of your time as I have wasted enough - get a life!
Richard Lusted
In article <34D48793...@dial.pipex.com>, Suzy Hall
<gb...@dial.pipex.com> writes
>
>
>Richard Lusted wrote:
>
>> In article <34D06BB7...@dial.pipex.com>, Mark Lewis
>> >> specialise in Children with disabilities.
>> >> Please contact Beverley Jones on tel. 0181...
>> >
>> >If Beverley Jones is a net citizen, why does she not make the post
>> >herself? If she is not, why should civilised people consider employing
>> >her?
>> >
>> accomodate her ?
>
>individuals is seeking to find work for her.
>
>As someone who has responsibility for the recruitment, and vetting, of
>social work staff I have to comment that this is a curious and somewhat
>doubtful manner of researching current vacancies (particularly those which
>involve substantial access to children).
>
>I suggest Ms. Jones gets the current vacancy list from those Local
>Authorities that she would wish to apply to, or reads ther current issues of
>Community Care.
>
friend ( no internet connection) and has all the qualifications and
paperwork which she would be pleased to send you if she is not already
on your firms books ? She is already registered with several agencies in
Bristol and London and has been looking for a job for six months. It
seems there are plenty of jobs for "live in" social work but not for
field workers ?
Thank you for pointing out where she can apply for a job.
Please would let me have your address so she can send you her details.
>Suze
Mark Lewis
Richard Lusted <networ...@networkmedia.co.uk> wrote:
> My sarcastic response...
Your response: "We are looking for uncivilised people to give her a job
maybe you can accomodate her ?", was incomprehensible. I nonetheless
exploited it as a focus for considering how net-citizens should regard
the employment of individuals who are not online. You failed to respond
to any of my questions or points.
Newsgroups exist primarily for debate - hence the concept of a 'thread'.
If you post something to a newsgroup, you should do so with the
expectation that people will attempt to engage you in discussion: That
is what newsgroups are for.
> ...received a predictable reply...
I find it inconceivable that you anticipated the content of my reply -
that you predicted I would reply is less astonishing.
>... to the amusement...
The opening was intended to be humorous.
> of myself and others.
Name them: unless they make their response publicly, by replying to this
thread, it is valueless.
> What the heavens did you do prior to the introduction of the
> Internet to bore the socks off everyone ?
I found the institutions of the pre-information society alien and
repugnant. The Internet has existed since the 70s.
Your judgement that I am boring can only be evaluated relative to what
you do find interesting: have you used the web or newsgroups to make
this clear?
Einstein stopped wearing socks after he discovered that they wore out.
> Beverly a friend is desparetely looking for a job in her area
> - field social work
We are drawing further information out of you by the process of debate.
The level of desperation is evident from the spelling alone.
BTW when did your friend change her name from Beverley?
> and we really don't need your inane comments.
An 'inane comment' is one empty of meaningful content. Is this
applicable?
> You act as if you own the Internet and continue to criticise all
> manner of people and postings on a regular basis.
The net is an anarchy - in place of organisation by formal rules we have
self-organisation that emerges from a social process. This very
discussion is part of that process. In saying that "newsgroups only
tolerate small-ads from regular contributors", I am merely describing a
social rule that has emerged from that nexus. You are at liberty to
challenge such rules: We, in turn, are at liberty to challenge you.
> Before you say post in jobs section there is no job section
> for the above
uk.jobs.wanted?
> and for heavens sake the poor girl wants a job.
If I wanted to assist Beverl*y, I would first put her CV up in my web
space. If I posted a personal ad to uk.local.southwest it would only be
welcome because I am a regular contributor and because I am implicitly
willing to debate any associated issues relating to social work in the
southwest.
I would, however, only wish to promote someone who is, or wishes to be,
an active online citizen. Perhaps you regard the domain of social work
as a sub-culture where such standards are inappropriate: if that is so,
it is a situation I would wish to reform.
I have not told you not to post such ads, I have merely attempted to
engage you in relevant discussion.
> Advertising as such rather than inane jokes and comments in poor
> taste seems to me a much better use of this fantastic medium.
The 'fantastic' thing about this medium is that it is two-way. The type
of ad that evolved in one-way conventional media is simply inappropriate
here: for that use the web or special newsgroups such as uk.adverts.*;.
If adverts were in demand, uk.adverts.* would be a big hit, but people
subscribe to newsgroups like uk.local.southwest to participate in, or
observe, debate.
> After your long winded reply
It was of similar length to your own.
> which will undoubtedly come and need someone from the planet Zog
> to translate and understand,
You wouldn't have a URL for these guys?
> i will ignore and not respond to your critical postings again,
This is an extremely rude comment. You should not post unless you are
prepared to engage people in argument.
> so don't waste to much of your time as I have wasted enough
Smart people enjoy debate: it is how they develop valid beliefs about
the world and learn to express ideas clearly. It's how they get smart
and stay smart.
Debate is not a 'waste of time': the more you discuss ideas, the more
efficient and fluent you become at presenting them. You also dispose
efficiently of untenable beliefs and move forward to fresh concepts.
> get a life!
Now that *is* an inane comment ie it is banal and empty of meaning.
Rik Baldwin
Mark Lewis <peri...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> Smart people enjoy debate:
No they don't!
> it is how they develop valid beliefs about the world and learn to
> express ideas clearly.
No it isn't.
> It's how they get smart and stay smart.
It isn't!
> Debate is not a 'waste of time':
No it's not.
> the more you discuss ideas, the more efficient and fluent you become
> at presenting them.
No you don't.
> You also dispose efficiently of untenable beliefs and move forward
> to fresh concepts.
You don't!
BTW is this a 5kb argument or the full Megabyte?
Rik
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<<< Rik Mail >>>
Escorts,Best-corts,Come in if you're saucy!No job too big or to small.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lewis
Rik Baldwin <r...@kendata.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> No they don't!
Yes they do!
> No it isn't.
Yes it is.
> It isn't!
It is!
> No it's not.
Yes it is.
> No you don't.
Yes you do.
> You don't!
You do!
But, on the whole, I think we agree.
Rik Mail
Mark Lewis <peri...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>> You don't!
> You do!
> But, on the whole, I think we agree.
No we DON'T!!
VinceH
In article <34DB0DE2...@dial.pipex.com>,
> > No it's not.
> Yes it is.
You said it isn't before. Make your mind up!
VinceH
* None of you showed conspicuous intelligence on this occasion.
--
I got no sig for now...
VinceH
In article <n13C...@kendata.demon.co.uk>,
Rik Baldwin <r...@kendata.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Mark Lewis <peri...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> > Debate is not a 'waste of time':
^^^
> No it's not.
You both seem to agree on this one, then :-)
VinceH
* I'd just as soon forget.
Rik Baldwin
In article <48153e89...@softrock.co.uk>,
VinceH <Vin...@softrock.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <n13C...@kendata.demon.co.uk>,
> Rik Baldwin <r...@kendata.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Mark Lewis <peri...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> > > Debate is not a 'waste of time':
> ^^^
> > No it's not.
This is where Mark contradicted me with "Yes it is!"
But as you correctly pointed out, I was actually agreeing with him on this
point, and he missed it!
Ah Ha! Gotcha Mark!
> You both seem to agree on this one, then :-)
> VinceH
Rik
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_ ___ | | |_ | \/Es |\ | \/___
/\/\ |_) | /\| | \/ | Rik Mail | | \|E/\ | __
/ \| \.\_/ \/|_ |_ / | | |_)OoR
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Escorts,Bestcorts!Come in if you're saucy,no job too big or too small!