|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Some people will always be too darn lazy or basically say "I don't have the time. Can't you just spoon feed me?" but having a huge list of links like that is only going to put off even more people from doing the necessary research themselves.
I remember only a single digit number of threads; definately nothing close to 3 dozen. And yes they were long but much easier than clicking on external links then trying to navigate those sites and hopefully finding what you are looking for, although this is made a whole lot more difficult you don't know the terminolgy for what you seek or at least have a basic knowledge of how the system works over here (which is what the old FAQs gave).
Besides each of the threads gave you a basic outline of the info they contained. You read the outline, hit Ctrl+F and skipped straight to any mention of whatever you are interested in if you didn't feel like reading the whole thing.
And as to what is not to understand, I've seen many questions posted on other sites from people who haven't undertstood something on government sites or they believe that the info on one page contradicts that on another. Also seen people simply give up trying to understand some of those sites. One of the reasons is the formal style of writing and the use of what many consider legalese. The FAQs were written in everyday language.
I've also seen questions highlighting some fantastic examples of syntactic ambiguities, the likes of which would never occur to those of us who have a good idea of how things work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| seklarwia wrote: |
| I remember only a single digit number of threads; definately nothing close to 3 dozen. |
There were 4 separate threads of links, and that definitely ran into more than single digits for individual FAQs.
| Quote: |
| And yes they were long but much easier than clicking on external links then trying to navigate those sites and hopefully finding what you are looking for, |
I see the second thread of FAQs looks more like this. Perhaps there was a reason for the different format on the first thread.
| Quote: |
| although this is made a whole lot more difficult you don't know the terminolgy for what you seek or at least have a basic knowledge of how the system works over here |
I think some people complained that there was no definitive answer in some cases, and that's understandable. FAQs can't always provide exact details, so I can see why it is sometimes necessary to send people to a link instead. And, in many cases it is just not possible to write a FAQ detailed enough to handhold people through a link to the exact answer (if it is even there).
| Quote: |
| And as to what is not to understand, I've seen many questions posted on other sites from people who haven't undertstood something on government sites or they believe that the info on one page contradicts that on another. Also seen people simply give up trying to understand some of those sites. One of the reasons is the formal style of writing and the use of what many consider legalese. The FAQs were written in everyday language. |
That's right but in some cases what they summarized led to discrepancies in interpretation. Nothing is perfect, I guess.
| Quote: |
| I've also seen questions highlighting some fantastic examples of syntactic ambiguities, the likes of which would never occur to those of us who have a good idea of how things work. |
I don't know what you mean by syntactic ambiguities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swampthing500
Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, that link about dispatch companies was very enlightening.
So JET is basically the only way to get a job in a public school?
I applied for it last year, but the wait time was far too long and I wanted to leave my home country ASAP, so I returned to Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I chose to go dispatch because I didn't have a few years to sit around and be rejected by the ever shrinking JET. But if I did have the time, I would have; JET would have been my preferred method of coming over.
But for anyone who choses to take a dispatch job make sure you do your research and understand what it is that you are letting yourself in for.
It's great that unions are trying to make a difference and reduce the hold dispatch companies have, because they are often positively prime-evil. But I do wish that the writers of those articles did a little research before accidently reporting falsehoods.
I mean the interview article was written in March 2010 and in one of the questions it states:
"Interac does not arrange an annual health exam for the teachers it employs."
Funny that, because Interac paid for and had us taken to our health checks this year and I had the same done only about a week after I arrived last year (March 2009, i.e. a year before this interview was posted).
It might have been true in the past and might still be true of other dispatchers, but to still be telling people stuff that now is nothing more than false propaganda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Swampthing500 wrote: |
| Well, that link about dispatch companies was very enlightening. |
Which one?
| Quote: |
| So JET is basically the only way to get a job in a public school? |
There are 3 ways.
1. dispatch agency
2. JET program
3. direct hire (rare)
There's a 4th way if you are willing to go through the Japanese university system and acquire a degree here and a teaching license so that you could work as a solo teacher, not ALT. But I suspect that is too much to ask.
| Quote: |
Interac paid for and had us taken to our health checks this year and I had the same done only about a week after I arrived last year (March 2009, i.e. a year before this interview was posted).
It might have been true in the past and might still be true of other dispatchers, but to still be telling people stuff that now is nothing more than false propaganda. |
Look, the union is staffed with volunteers. Don't knock their efforts without thinking. Perhaps they are short-handed. Perhaps they just were not informed. Give them a call if you want to improve matters instead of calling them liars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Glenski wrote: |
| Look, the union is staffed with volunteers. Don't knock their efforts without thinking. Perhaps they are short-handed. Perhaps they just were not informed. Give them a call if you want to improve matters instead of calling them liars. |
I think I quite adquately expressed that I thought that theirs was a noble cause. And I think that I did say that they did it accidently rather than calling them liars, so thank you for telling me that I made the comment without thinking.
But just because they are voluteers doesn't justify doing a sloppy job. I've done my fair share of volunteer work across the years and in more than a few, if you didn't do the job properly, people (and in one case, animals) suffered as the result. We were not above blame just because of our volunteer status and quite rightly so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, so you said accidentally. The word "falsehood" threw me with its stronger implication of a lie. You could at least acknowledge it as a "mistake" instead.
I agree that volunteering doesn't justify making mistakes, but considering how much they actually do, I think you ought to cut them a little more slack. It's not like their web site is full of such errors, it is?
So, have you contacted them with the correct information so they can post it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdoor
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seklarwia wrote: |
| ...It might have been true in the past and might still be true of other dispatchers, but to still be telling people stuff that now is nothing more than false propaganda. |
Yeah, it is very difficult to cut through the fog and get good information.
Glenski, I received an unsolicited PM from a board member awhile back in response to a previous thread I posted in. It basically said that you regularly post authoritatively about subjects you know little about.
You write some direct negative comments about dispatch companies. Have you ever work with a dispatch company or at a public school? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mdoor wrote: |
| Glenski, I received an unsolicited PM from a board member awhile back in response to a previous thread I posted in. It basically said that you regularly post authoritatively about subjects you know little about. |
Don't believe everything people tell you. Nice to see people choose to remain anonymous and talk about me behind my back. Doesn't bother me.
| Quote: |
| You write some direct negative comments about dispatch companies. Have you ever work with a dispatch company or at a public school? |
No, but does that make my comments any less true? C'mon. What information have I written that disturbs you to the point of disbelief? That is the reason you're writing, isn't it? If it's just to repeat some anonymous person's opinion, let's drop it right here or go to PM. I hate having to defend myself to an invisible accuser.
BTW, I see a pattern in the majority of your posts in response to what I post. I suggest cutting it out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdoor
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Glenski, to answer your question: yes, your posts do ring untrue to me. In the first thread I addressed you, you were chastising a poster as they felt online rental information was unclear. It turned out you were never a renter of that property, never had to try to use the online information and had no idea what was going on.
I worked with a dispach company in 2008 and 2009. It was a fine experience. In this thread, you are a dominate poster making negative comments about dispatch companies, yet you have no experience with the topic at hand.
I echo seklarwia's comment above that it is a disservice to readers to have old material found on the net regurgitated like it is fresh, first hand information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shostahoosier
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 30
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not Glenski, a sock, a troll or an expert, but I have to comment on some of the heinous things you've said about the man....
| mdoor wrote: |
| Glenski, to answer your question: yes, your posts do ring untrue to me. In the first thread I addressed you, you were chastising a poster as they felt online rental information was unclear. It turned out you were never a renter of that property, never had to try to use the online information and had no idea what was going on. |
I wouldnt go that far. I remember reading that thread and it was pretty much an example of someone who needed to contact the property herself if she wanted specific info. Glenski directed the person to a link. You said so yourself that information varies by location and other factors (which Glenski also said). Either way, most of their questions were pretty basic (is there key money?, a deposit?) and were answered on the site. Everything else (how much?) MOD EDIT
| mdoor wrote: |
| I worked with a dispach company in 2008 and 2009. It was a fine experience. In this thread, you are a dominate poster making negative comments about dispatch companies, yet you have no experience with the topic at hand. |
MOD EDIT It's great that you had a positive experience in the 2 years that you worked for your dispatch company. Glenski, however, has been here for a while longer and his "opinions" seem to match the general consensus of what most ALTs think of the dispatch industry. I would be annoyed if Glenski was telling people the complete opposite of what everyone else says, and then spouted it off like it was personal experience. It just sounds to me like he's passing along information he's heard (and knows) from being here a while.
| mdoor wrote: |
| I echo seklarwia's comment above that it is a disservice to readers to have old material found on the net regurgitated like it is fresh, first hand information. |
Well, Glenski is volunteering to help people. If people are so unhappy they are welcome to, you know, actually do the research themselves...rather than have it spoonfed to them on a messagboard.
I would say most of the questions being asked on any ESL board could be found if people just used the search function. The rest could be found by contacting people directly.
Life sure was great when people could 1) Not hide behind the anonymity of the internet, and 2)Were used to doing actual research, rather than complaining when it didnt appear in the first 5 results of their google search... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Glenski wrote: |
| Ok, so you said accidentally. The word "falsehood" threw me with its stronger implication of a lie. You could at least acknowledge it as a "mistake" instead. |
Since a "falsehood" is an untrue statement or a statement lacking accuracy, there was nothing wrong with my choice of wording. Couple that with the fact that neither paragraph nor even sentence held any of the implication you so readily read into a single plucked-out word, I have no need to acknowledge anything. Nor will I insist that you acknowledge that you knocked my post without thinking.
| Quote: |
| I agree that volunteering doesn't justify making mistakes, but considering how much they actually do, I think you ought to cut them a little more slack. |
How am I suppose to cut them anymore slack? I acknowledged that they are working towards a good goal. Gave them the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming they were delibrately making false statments. Even acknowledged that what they said may have been true in the past and may still apply to other dispatchers now.
Should I have just turned a blind eye because they are volunteers and they mean well?
| Quote: |
| It's not like their web site is full of such errors, it is? |
I don't know. I haven't read the union site in full and even if I had, I don't claim to have first hand experience and detailed knowledge of the ins and outs of the many dispatchers out there now or back when many of their articles were written, so how could I know that? But how can you be so sure it isn't?
But more importantly, even if those links had been entirely accurate when they were written, how can you be so sure that the info in the links you are telling people to read dating back years is still 100% accurate now?
| Quote: |
| So, have you contacted them with the correct information so they can post it? |
I have not and will not be contacting them for reasons of my own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdoor
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
'
| shostahoosier wrote: |
I'm not Glenski, a sock, a troll or an expert, but I have to comment on some of the heinous things you've said about the man....
| mdoor wrote: |
| Glenski, to answer your question: yes, your posts do ring untrue to me. In the first thread I addressed you, you were chastising a poster as they felt online rental information was unclear. It turned out you were never a renter of that property, never had to try to use the online information and had no idea what was going on. |
I wouldnt go that far. I remember reading that thread and it was pretty much an example of someone who needed to contact the property herself if she wanted specific info. Glenski directed the person to a link. You said so yourself that information varies by location and other factors (which Glenski also said). Either way, most of their questions were pretty basic (is there key money?, a deposit?) and were answered on the site. Everything else (how much?) MOD EDIT
| mdoor wrote: |
| I worked with a dispach company in 2008 and 2009. It was a fine experience. In this thread, you are a dominate poster making negative comments about dispatch companies, yet you have no experience with the topic at hand. |
You dont have to be a rape victim to know that its not a good time. It's great that you had a positive experience in the 2 years that you worked for your dispatch company. Glenski, however, has been here for a while longer and his "opinions" seem to match the general consensus of what most ALTs think of the dispatch industry. I would be annoyed if Glenski was telling people the complete opposite of what everyone else says, and then spouted it off like it was personal experience. It just sounds to me like he's passing along information he's heard (and knows) from being here a while.
| mdoor wrote: |
| I echo seklarwia's comment above that it is a disservice to readers to have old material found on the net regurgitated like it is fresh, first hand information. |
Well, Glenski is volunteering to help people. If people are so unhappy they are welcome to, you know, actually do the research themselves...rather than have it spoonfed to them on a messagboard.
I would say most of the questions being asked on any ESL board could be found if people just used the search function. The rest could be found by contacting people directly.
Life sure was great when people could 1) Not hide behind the anonymity of the internet, and 2)Were used to doing actual research, rather than complaining when it didnt appear in the first 5 results of their google search... |
�Heinous� that is a gross overreaction. Good to know you are not a Glenski or a sock. That seems a perfectly normal preface to any post. 
I questioned if Glenski had any experience to post authoritatively about the subjects he posts about. It turns out he often does not. I am sure none of that qualifies as �heinous�.
As for the apartment thread, what you describe does not really match the post I wrote about. It is great he posted a link to the apartment website, but then went to far too far. The girl's additional questions about what was on the website made sense to me. I used the website and rented an apartment from the outfit. I went through the same routine she is going through now. Glenski just mocked her with "you having some problems reading the English on the site" for coming back to the thread looking for clarification. It seems Glenski has no clue about what she was going through and no disclosure that he did not actually ever rent there or even ever live in the same city where they rent apartments. After that, who knows if she will ever return to the thread to read my expericnce renting from them.
Good to know you prefer people moving along like a heard passing down the line rumor and hearsay. I just thought some actual first hand knowledge from someone who I don't know ... actually worked with a dispatch company or at a public school might be a breath of fresh air to a thread like this. To each his own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seklarwia wrote: |
| Quote: |
| So, have you contacted them with the correct information so they can post it? |
I have not and will not be contacting them for reasons of my own. |
Then you have no reason to complain anymore about "falsehoods", accidental or otherwise, old or new, from the union website.
If you are not part of the solution (and you seem to have the firsthand information they need), you are part of the problem (inaccurate information). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mdoor wrote: |
| I questioned if Glenski had any experience to post authoritatively about the subjects he posts about. It turns out he often does not. |
Your idea of "authoritatively" leaves a lot to be desired, IMO.
| Quote: |
| As for the apartment thread, what you describe does not really match the post I wrote about. It is great he posted a link to the apartment website, but then went to far too far. The girl's additional questions about what was on the website made sense to me. I used the website and rented an apartment from the outfit. I went through the same routine she is going through now. Glenski just mocked her with "you having some problems reading the English on the site" for coming back to the thread looking for clarification. It seems Glenski has no clue about what she was going through and no disclosure that he did not actually ever rent there or even ever live in the same city where they rent apartments. After that, who knows if she will ever return to the thread to read my expericnce renting from them. |
Now is it is my turn to shed light on this.
wayne432 gave the link to LeoPalace (not me).
stefanreynolds responded in about 20 minutes saying they couldn't read Japanese.
I pointed out the English function (written in English, no less). Then I wrote "Used to be, LeoPalace actually had an FAQ which listed some prices. Not anymore, I see. So, you'll pay various prices depending on what size and location of place you have."
So, I acknowledged early on that there was no definite answer (and others agreed), but that stefanreynolds should try reading more in English.
stefanreynolds' response? Not a single thank you or note that they'd read the site. Just this a month later: "does leopalace ask for key money? how much will cost to set up an apartment , ie: how much money do you have to put down on day 1?"
I felt it was necessary to ask if they had read the English site. I also asked if they had even contacted LeoPalace (since it seemed the logical thing to do. No mocking.
stefanreynolds' response? "supreme oracle glenski: the english site provides insufficient information and lacks clarity"
I asked again if they had even contacted LeoPalace. Zero response to date (a week later).
Then mdoor chimed in with the same sort of off-topic third-degree questions as on this thread to me (which made no sense) and explained as others had that there was no clear answer. Now I'm the bad guy for offering the same sort of advice?!
| Quote: |
| no disclosure that he did not actually ever rent there or even ever live in the same city |
Wrong! Read the post! I answered you!
mdoor, you wonder if stefanreynolds will ever return to read your answers (same as others). Me, too, considering their track record. But, have you even tried sending a PM? You seem to have the firsthand info they need. How about it?
Let's not get any further off the topic of this thread. I've already asked you to cut it out once. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
