College Interviews and E-mail Addresses

[QuikSand]

... and a related question about the domain. Is it reasonable to make any inferences from the domain name used by an applicant for a non-entry-level position?

Specifically, I am looking at a batch of applications submitted via email, and there are two main groups represented thus far: gmail and cable companies.


I know when I got an "invitation" from my cable company to set up my email through them, my quick response was basically a silent "screw you, I'm not committing something as important as my email address to you, when this is purely a relationship of financial convenience for me." I wonder is it reasonable to just assume that people who decide to use a cable company address (comcast.net, verizon.net) for this sort of purpose are those who are unable or unwilling to make the same sort of judgment that I did automatically, way back when?

Fair?

[Subby]

I want to feel the same way, I really do. That said, I have been after my wife for a few years to give up her verizon.net address but her reasoning for keeping it is pretty solid - "everyone knows this address - why would I go through the hassle of changing it?"

"But Gmail has a killer proprietary spam filtering system and filters that enable you to auto-tag your email with labels and stars!"

"You are a fucking nerd."

[Honolulu_Blue]

I am not sure if it's fair. I never accepted the invitation from Comcast for the very same reasons you mentioned.

That said, a good friend of mine, who is a smart guy, successful guy and very tech savvy, has a comcast.net email address. I have always been a bit surprised at it, but have never asked why.

Then again, my primary non-work email is still hotmail simply because I've had it forever.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

... and a related question about the domain. Is it reasonable to make any inferences from the domain name used by an applicant for a non-entry-level position?

I think it's somewhat reasonable,but it's probably fair to note that different people (and/or different professions?) may make different inferences.

For example, I typically discount the user about a notch if they're clearly using a web-based email such as gmail. I do make an exception to that if it's someone that I'm pretty sure is using it as a backup/spare account when they've unexpectedly become unemployed or something (i.e. your work account was your primary & then it suddenly went away).

I suspect that similar prejudices would exist in other fields, such as having (or not having) a .edu address for example.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I missed this thread the first time around, and since I am in the job market, it is something that I had thought about.

My industry is pretty much a one-page standard, with the highlights that are necessary for the job, so that it can be scanned for qualifications quickly.

I had given a long thought to my email handle as well, as the one that I use now is well over 10 years old, but since it has to do with aviation (not PilotMan, which would need to go, it's the more benign 3letterinitialaviator) I decided to keep it for my professional resume rather than use the alternate addresses which are simply my name @.

It would probably be better to switch, but since I use one email for 99.9 percent of all communication I didn't want to miss anything important.

You're in the job market?? Sorry to hear that.

[digamma]

This reminds me I received a letter from an attorney for a vendor recently.

His contact e-mail was [email protected].

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I think it's somewhat reasonable,but it's probably fair to note that different people (and/or different professions?) may make different inferences.

For example, I typically discount the user about a notch if they're clearly using a web-based email such as gmail. I do make an exception to that if it's someone that I'm pretty sure is using it as a backup/spare account when they've unexpectedly become unemployed or something (i.e. your work account was your primary & then it suddenly went away).

I suspect that similar prejudices would exist in other fields, such as having (or not having) a .edu address for example.

Um.. what? Unless they are writing you from their place of work for you to do business in regards to said job, what do you expect their email provider to be?? What is wrong with a web-based provider? That is what the LARGE majority of tech savvy individuals use. Even people with their own domains use it and you may not realize it.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

For example, I typically discount the user about a notch if they're clearly using a web-based email such as gmail.

Well, in my narrow context, I'm talking about people applying for a job. In most cases, I think it shows appropriate discretion to avoid using a work-related email for such purposes, and for most people (myself included) the obvious way to do so is with a web-based provider. That doesn't seem to be a choice driven by a myopic ignorance of available options, but rather just what nearly everyone in that situation would choose.

I can't see holding a gmail address against anyone in this setting. If anything, I find it to be a slightly more refined choice than the other prevalent, free, and web-based options like yahoo, hotmail, or aol.

[lordscarlet]

I don't see why anyone would be using POP/IMAP/etc except in an enterprise setting at your company where they are using something such as Exchange Server.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Subby

I want to feel the same way, I really do. That said, I have been after my wife for a few years to give up her verizon.net address but her reasoning for keeping it is pretty solid - "everyone knows this address - why would I go through the hassle of changing it?"

"But Gmail has a killer proprietary spam filtering system and filters that enable you to auto-tag your email with labels and stars!"

"You are a fucking nerd."

It took me a couple years but I weened my wife off of her old ATT email address by showing her what gmail could do. I forwarded her old mail to it, imported her old mail, and set it up so when she did respond to emails sent the old address they would be replies from the new gmail address (this was after she sent out a couple emails to everyone that her address changed). Lastly if she saw someone email her at the old address she would remind them of the new address (if it was someone she wanted to keep in touch with). After about a year we removed the ATT account and she has never looked back. (all probably steps you know and would do, since you are web savvy).

That's basically the same thing I did with my mom at her work when we got them a domain set up years back.

It's a long process but so worthwhile in the long run.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Um.. what? Unless they are writing you from their place of work for you to do business in regards to said job, what do you expect their email provider to be?? What is wrong with a web-based provider? That is what the LARGE majority of tech savvy individuals use. Even people with their own domains use it and you may not realize it.

{shrug} I think web-based providers tend to be largely the purview of people too cheap/too unsuccessful to have a decent other option. Or too feeble-minded and/or too lazy to handle anything that isn't tethered to the almighty interwebz.

Which isn't all that unusual of a perception in my world, at least not based on numerous conversations I've had for years about how almost embarrassed most people have seemed to be about using them even when there's a perfectly good reason (i.e. regular email is crashed/bugged,ec).

Over the past three years, I've got over 10k emails saved from probably 500 or more users. Of those, I believe there are a total of two Gmail accounts other than my wife's. My son's now counts as one of the aliased ones though, that's what his school runs the students emails through.

Like I said (and this was really the point I was trying to make by commenting earlier), I believe you'll find different prejudices depending upon the industry/niche you're familiar with.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

{shrug} I think web-based providers tend to be largely the purview of people too cheap/too unsuccessful to have a decent other option. Or too feeble-minded and/or too lazy to handle anything that isn't tethered to the almighty interwebz.

Which isn't all that unusual of a perception in my world, at least not based on numerous conversations I've had for years about how almost embarrassed most people have seemed to be about using them even when there's a perfectly good reason (i.e. regular email is crashed/bugged,ec).

Over the past three years, I've got over 10k emails saved from probably 500 or more users. Of those, I believe there are a total of two Gmail accounts other than my wife's. My son's now counts as one of the aliased ones though, that's what his school runs the students emails through.

Like I said (and this was really the point I was trying to make by commenting earlier), I believe you'll find different prejudices depending upon the industry/niche you're familiar with.

I would say, being in the technology industry, that you are flat out wrong. IT is not the " people too cheap/too unsuccessful to have a decent other option. Or too feeble-minded and/or too lazy to handle anything that isn't tethered to the almighty interwebz." it is people smart enough to see that it is a far better option than the alternatives. I think you will pretty much find that all people with knowledge of how email, mail servers, maintenance, security, etc would be on my side. We see "you" (those who won't use such services) as the ones that are "too feeble-minded and/or lazy to handle anything that is" different from what they have used for the previous ten years.

[molson]

I understand what Jon's saying when we're just talking business/client/work emails. I would find it pretty strange to get an email from an attorney like [email protected]. I would wonder where the hell his office is and whether he set it up yesterday in his mother's basement.

If we're talking job applicants, or freelancers, or otherwise independent people, they're all going to have gmail addresses. Anything else would be a little strange in that context.

[lighthousekeeper]

I send email using my personal domain, simply because [email protected] has already been taken.


Signed,
[email protected]



Edit to add: upon further review, [email protected] is actually available!!!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

I would say, being in the technology industry, that you are flat out wrong.

Makes the point I was making really, there's that industry thing again.

I give less than a rat's ass what you use. But how anyone can get any significant use out of the mass disorganization that is Gmail completely escapes me.

That you say it's some sort of tech industry favorite (while I interact via email with virtually no one who uses it) doesn't surprise me in the least. A big part of my work life the past couple of years has been serving as the "translator" between our main client & their tech sub-contractors, since it's rarely a good idea for the two to be in the same room, the whole Mars vs Venus thing. Luckily I speak just enough of both languages to translate & both sides get considerably less frustrated with me than they do with each other. It may very well be the updated version of how sales & creatives were often kept as far apart as possible in both broadcasting & agency environments.

[Alan T]

I am a network engineer, and for about 10 years I ran my own home email server off of my own domain and used that email address for most of these type of things. I stopped that about 2-3 years ago when free web email services caught up in what they offered as far as spam filtering, Antivirus protection and other various offerings.

There are many corporations that use google for their corporate email solution today as well. (Obviously it is [email protected] just hosted by google and not [email protected]) I absolutely have no problem if people are using the more reputable email hosted providers that are free.

I don't know that I feel strongly for or against the usage of ISP hosted email, but I probably haven't relied on one of those since back in the mid 1990s with netcom personally. I don't know that I instantly think of someone who does use one as being uneducated though.

Probably the only email domains that I really have problems with are things like @aol.com makes me to this day still think of the AOL user that had no idea how the internet works, or similar type of addresses.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Makes the point I was making really, there's that industry thing again.

I give less than a rat's ass what you use. But how anyone can get any significant use out of the mass disorganization that is Gmail completely escapes me.

That you say it's some sort of tech industry favorite (while I interact via email with virtually no one who uses it) doesn't surprise me in the least. A big part of my work life the past couple of years has been serving as the "translator" between our main client & their tech sub-contractors, since it's rarely a good idea for the two to be in the same room, the whole Mars vs Venus thing. Luckily I speak just enough of both languages to translate & both sides get considerably less frustrated with me than they do with each other. It may very well be the updated version of how sales & creatives were often kept as far apart as possible in both broadcasting & agency environments.

You're either not getting or not caring about my point. It's not about opinion. You "think" that gmail is for lazy people who can't find something better. The fact is that opinion on experts in email is that it IS a great choice. Particularly for individuals. Businesses should certainly have their own domain, as Alan T has pointed out. But you are FLAT OUT WRONG if you think that people use gmail because they are lazy, unsuccessful or feeble-minded. You can sit there and insult people like the jerk you can be, but you are wrong on this one. I know you'll come back with some comment that you think makes yourself look better than me, or calmer than me, but, surprisingly, you don't know everything and you are capable of being an idiot, and this proves it without question. Your "opinion" is contradictory to the fact that gmail and other hosted services are equal to or superior to in-house services. There are entire school districts, corporations, and governments that had people far more knowledgeable on the subject than you choose to use their services over the other options.

[molson]

That might be the most passionate defense of gmail in the history of the internet.

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by molson

That might be the most passionate defense of gmail in the history of the internet.

It's more of an offense against Jon's ignorance, arrogance and rudeness.

[CU Tiger]

I don't know LS....as much as itt pains me, I side pretty heavily with Jon on this one. For whatever reason I subconsciously snicker when I see a .gmail account on a resume.

Often in my work IT IS an indication that the applicant doesn't have home internet service (a major obstacle to their success in my company).

Note: I am not commenting on the quality, security, intelligence or other benefit to gmail or others such webmail accounts. BUT for me and many I know the "portability" of gmail tells me you are not rooted enough in anuyting or may be too transient to be dependable.

That said, I love the functionality integration that outlook gives me without being connected in any way to Google and am not a big fan of the gmail interface.

Many people are blindly trusting of Google, I am not. I prefer that company to have as little info on me as possible.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Often in my work IT IS an indication that the applicant doesn't have home internet service (a major obstacle to their success in my company).

Just an FYI 85% of the customers that sign up with Road Runner from Time Warner cable have existing email services they use instead of Road Runner mail. So your indication is wrong from my observation.

[lighthousekeeper]

today happens to be a day I am reviewing a lot of resumes, so of course I am over-obsessing on their email addys.

[Marmel]

This thread has taken a strange turn. I've both been looking for work and accepting resumes at my job in the last 5 years. I agree that the first part of an email address should be appropriate, but this whole discussion about the second part is bizarre.

Frankly, if I was turned down for a job because I had either comcast.net or gmail.com, I would just say I dodged a bullet in not working for that person.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Um.. what? Unless they are writing you from their place of work for you to do business in regards to said job, what do you expect their email provider to be?? What is wrong with a web-based provider? That is what the LARGE majority of tech savvy individuals use. Even people with their own domains use it and you may not realize it.

You're forgetting - this is Jon. He's stuck in the 1950's.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

It's more of an offense against Jon's ignorance, arrogance and rudeness.

i fuckin love you

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

85% of the customers that sign up with Road Runner from Time Warner cable have existing email services they use instead of Road Runner mail. So your indication is wrong from my observation.

This.

I signed up for Verizon here at my apartment in July and haven't even bothered to setup my free @verizon.com email yet. No reason to. I have work email, and i have a gmail widget on my desktop that acts just like an inbox.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

BUT for me and many I know the "portability" of gmail tells me you are not rooted enough in anuyting or may be too transient to be dependable.

See, now this is the exact reason I have a gmail account--for pretty much the opposite of your concerns. For stability. Roots. Dependability. Whatever you want to call it. I may change internet providers. I may change jobs. I may change homes and whatever else, but I can keep my e-mail account, keep docs, pictures, whatever else there in addition to using it as a non-work e-mail address.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by digamma

See, now this is the exact reason I have a gmail account--for pretty much the opposite of your concerns. For stability. Roots. Dependability. Whatever you want to call it. I may change internet providers. I may change jobs. I may change homes and whatever else, but I can keep my e-mail account, keep docs, pictures, whatever else there in addition to using it as a non-work e-mail address.

exactly.

[molson]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

It's more of an offense against Jon's ignorance, arrogance and rudeness.

Which you countered with personal attacks, so I see it as a wash at best.

I'm with Marmel though - there's been a lot of eye-opening moments for me on FOFC over the years about peculiar hiring practices and what sends someone to the trash immediately. I hope I never work for any of you people.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

It's more of an offense against Jon's ignorance, arrogance and rudeness.

Well fuck you too.

I commented in response to the observation that Quik made about people using cable domain emails, pointing out how different conclusions can (and sometimes are) drawn based on domains. I took no particular offense at his observation, even recognized a similar behavior in myself & acknowledged it.

You then replied like the typical obnoxious tech geek who just couldn't fathom why everyone didn't bow to your fucking brilliance. Like I said, I give less than a damn what you want to use for email, if it makes you happy then knock yourself out. But you run the same risk of being judged as the cableco.net user that QS mentioned, just by a different group of people.

Here's a news flash skippy: the "LARGE majority of tech savvy individuals" you seem so jacked up about work for people who give a shit about the latest-uber-super-groovy-trendy bullshit, no matter how many neato terms you want to throw around in praise of whatever. And that employment rests largely on their willingness to put up with an obnoxious streak that rivals the WAR-dictates-player-value crowd.

And here's the real kicker: a great many of those "tech savvy individuals" have jobs because of all the people they so enjoy pretending to be superior too, pretending so hard because they know their future is controlled by people who have different skill sets that aren't nearly as easily replaced by the next disposable asset in a dime a dozen package.

That neither ignorant nor arrogant, that's the fucking truth? Rude? I don't believe it's anything remotely undeserved, damned sure not anything you didn't bring on yourself.

edit: Oh, damn, almost forgot There are entire school districts, corporations, and governments that had people far more knowledgeable on the subject than you choose to use their services over the other options.. Sure there are, same as there were a lot of people who got burned by Madoff, or made lousy investment decisions. Those choices are often being tolerated by people with actual decision making authority because they simply don't give a fuck what system is used just so long as they don't have to sit through 3 more weeks of meetings with drones who they aren't listening to past the first two minutes of the interminable session. It has little to nothing to do with the quality nor usefulness of the product itself, they just want shit that works without too much aggravation. If/when it becomes too much of an annoyance, they'll just replace the twit who made the choice & find someone else with the next big idea, stifling a yawn all the while.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by digamma

See, now this is the exact reason I have a gmail account--for pretty much the opposite of your concerns. For stability. Roots. Dependability. Whatever you want to call it. I may change internet providers. I may change jobs. I may change homes and whatever else, but I can keep my e-mail account, keep docs, pictures, whatever else there in addition to using it as a non-work e-mail address.

Look I am not pretending to be right or wrong. Just stating my personal preference. Locally there is a cable company that is exclusive to NC/SC Comporium Communications (they have cable, local phone internet and a att/cingular based cell plan) if I see an application for [email protected], I generally think that is a person who has considered the ptions and chose to have a comporium accountbecause he will be in the area for thee long haul. Frankly if he is likely to move more than an hour away he is useless to me. I only have a ~100 mile coverage radius in my business. If I were a national company I would look at this differently. All I can tell you is in the last 2 years I have done well over $2,000,000 in work for Google and I would NEVER have a .gmail account. Now frankly despite anti-trust laws preventing such actions, I can never have a yahoo mail, ymail, or hotmail account or I would owe them money. Now should I allow employees to use yahoo.com or yahoo search unless i want big brother G breathing down my neck....but I digress.

[bhlloy]

I'm baffled as well by the concept that gmail isn't an acceptable email address to apply to jobs with. Disclaimer: I am in tech and hiring for entry level positions, but I'd say 80% of the resumes we see are gmail or hotmail. I've never even considered getting an email address with an ISP. That means I would have had to change email adresses 8-10 times in the last 15 years vs changing twice (hotmail -> gmail)

I'm even more stunned that people would use it as an indicator of whether to hire somebody or not. To me it just means this person isn't in school, if they have a work email address they obviously aren't using it to apply to jobs and they consider it convenient not to have an email address set up with their ISP. I'm sure it's a generational thing... but wow.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

I send email using my personal domain, simply because [email protected] has already been taken.


Signed,
[email protected]



Edit to add: upon further review, [email protected] is actually available!!!

So... did you register it already or is someone else going to jump on this one?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Many people are blindly trusting of Google, I am not. I prefer that company to have as little info on me as possible.

I've said my piece about my personal preferences and prejudices as far as email goes, and don't care passionately enough to say those that think differently from me are wrong. I realize that they just think differently from me. I did want to comment on this though with an interesting factoid since I don't think you are alone in this feeling about Google.

Recently my company's CIO has been questioning if we need to spend the tons of money that we do to constantly continue upgrading our company's global mail infrastructure (we are an exchange shop internally) and look into if it would be worth going for a corporate google mail set up. As more companies are "moving to the cloud" moving mail services to google is actually a very common thing that many companies are doing to save money. Our mail team however is passionately against it. (Note, I am a network engineer so am not on the mail team and not really a part of this discussion topic).

Along the way though, some of the various information reviewed was a bit mind boggling. Due to the large number of gmail accounts out there, and various other infrastructure that hits google in some manner or another, over 40% of all email in the domestic united states at some point or another passes through the google network somewhere or another. The one thing people have to keep in mind is email, no matter where you host it has to be assumed to be vulnerable for others getting into your business. So if you really have confidential or sensitive material, making sure to use some form of data encryption inside of the email (such as pgp) is pretty important.

Anyways, not really a knock against or for google here, just wanted to mention even if you don't have an account at gmail, a decent amount of your email at some point or another may "reside" somewhere inside of google's infrastructure.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Marmel

Frankly, if I was turned down for a job because I had either comcast.net or gmail.com, I would just say I dodged a bullet in not working for that person.

Two things here.

First, I feel pretty confident in asserting that a huge range of pretty important decisions are profoundly affected, either consciously or not, by seemingly trivial things like this. I'm not saying that it's right, I'm just saying that it is. Huge contracts, business location decisions, hiring and firing, personal relationships, and on and on... these things routinely pivot on something as seemingly banal as a certain glance, a mannerism, a tie selection, an untied shoelace, spinach on teeth, a breath mint, or whatnot. Small things create big impressions, that's just how things go. This is one segment of that phenomenon that we';re dissecting a bit more than is expected, but you can probably take it to the bank that any number of major good or bad things that have happened to you in your life have been at least partially (but meaningfully) attributable to tiny, tiny little elements of the situation that you very likely didn't even notice. It's pretty much how people are wired to work.

Second, I don't want to overstate this sort of thing. I can't imagine that I will at any level actually "turn someone down for a job because of a comcast domain." I am going to do what I can to select the best person I can, that's pretty straightforward. But underneath that rational approach, is it possible that something this trivial could contribute to an impression that a certain person is (or isn't) that best person... absolutely.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

First, I feel pretty confident in asserting that a huge range of pretty important decisions are profoundly affected, either consciously or not, by seemingly trivial things like this. I'm not saying that it's right, I'm just saying that it is.

Which is actually what made your post today more interesting, to me at least.

But underneath that rational approach, is it possible that something this trivial could contribute to an impression that a certain person is (or isn't) that best person... absolutely.

Which is really at the core of what I was saying ... and somehow, unless I'm way off base (and that does happen occasionally with ppl here), you got that from my initial comment & saw it in roughly the same light as I saw yours: more like a social observation with a tech component than anything else.

It's one of the things that I've tried to pass along to some of these HS kids I've spent the last few months working with: You can be as right as you want but unless you're perceived as being correct & credible in the eyes of the decision makers then being right only gets you a cup of Starbucks if you've got $2. (That went hand in hand with a discussion about selection bias, the difference in your taste vs the taste of your available and/or target audience, and so forth).

[lordscarlet]

Originally Posted by molson

Which you countered with personal attacks, so I see it as a wash at best.

I'm with Marmel though - there's been a lot of eye-opening moments for me on FOFC over the years about peculiar hiring practices and what sends someone to the trash immediately. I hope I never work for any of you people.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well fuck you too.

I commented in response to the observation that Quik made about people using cable domain emails, pointing out how different conclusions can (and sometimes are) drawn based on domains. I took no particular offense at his observation, even recognized a similar behavior in myself & acknowledged it.

You then replied like the typical obnoxious tech geek who just couldn't fathom why everyone didn't bow to your fucking brilliance. Like I said, I give less than a damn what you want to use for email, if it makes you happy then knock yourself out. But you run the same risk of being judged as the cableco.net user that QS mentioned, just by a different group of people.

Here's, the difference, Jon, since you seem unable to grasp it. QS, etc, did not result to calling people feeble-minded and lazy. They did not state that their opinion was superior and the other option was wrong. You are the only one that did that. You are incapable of taking one side of an argument without saying the other side of the argument is stupid or lazy or in requirement of a death sentence. You will not see anyone else in this thread saying that taking the opposing option for email is stupid. Everyone else is simply saying they find it interesting that they have a bias for who they would choose based on their own situation.

[Honolulu Blue]

HB # 2 here. I'm glad this got bumped because I missed it the first, second, third, and fourth times around. It's been an interesting read.

I'm not in a position where I have to evaluate applications for admissions or employment, but if I were, I don't think I'd make too many assumptions about a person's e-mail address. I certainly wouldn't reject someone because of it - except, possibly, at the extremes.

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Is it reasonable to make any inferences from the domain name used by an applicant for a non-entry-level position?

I'd make even fewer assumptions on the back portion as I would the personalized, front portion.

However, what's gotten really big since this topic was started in 2005 is social networking. I think it's a lot more important to keep the incendiary tweets, drunk photos, and rowdy friends away than it is to have a "clean" e-mail.

[Icy]

Totally agree, I also reviewed applications in the past and found that some applicants were making a huge mistake with those email addresses that could add pre-judgement to their resumes.

That is why i have several different free mail accounts, some used for gaming forums etc are more informal and some are for more serious stuff, that contain mainly my name, initials etc, besides my websites and company email addresses.

The only fun thing is that when i started to use icy at forums, mail address etc like 15 years ago, everybody thought it was something "cool" but in fact ICY is just my name and surnames initials (in Spain we use two surnames, from father and mother, as women keep their surname when married) and have nothing to do with ice creams or cold stuff.

[stevew]

I can't wait for the first candidate to get tanked for forum posts he made in college. My guess is we see it by 2032 or thereabouts.

[Ryan S]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I am a network engineer, and for about 10 years I ran my own home email server off of my own domain and used that email address for most of these type of things. I stopped that about 2-3 years ago when free web email services caught up in what they offered as far as spam filtering, Antivirus protection and other various offerings.

I work in IT, and I use gmail as my primary personal email account. The fact that I can access everything anywhere is a massive selling point. I also much prefer the interface, and it means I don't have to install an email client on my home PC.

Before I hit the job market 10 years ago, I registered a domain name and set up email forwarding. This allows me to change email accounts without needing to tell everyone my new address, and also means that the recipient has no idea where they come from (unless he looks at the headers).

[sterlingice]

My wife is on an professional editor listserv and they just went through this same hissy fit. Looks like it's true across the board that, well, there's no agreement across the board. They even went so far as to compare, say, aol to gmail to your own domain name, etc.

I think there are also 2 different uses we're looking at:
1) Business correspondence: You bet that anything related to work will have either the domain of my employer or the domain of the company I'm contracted out to. If, say, I'm asking for access to a server on your domain with a gmail account...
2) Job candidates: Presumably, some will be unemployed, at which point, they won't be able to use a current employer's domain name. Similarly, do you really want them to be using their current employer's domain email if they are currently employed? For instance, if you're recruiting for jobs at Shell, do you want someone using their Exxon email address for what is distinctly a non-business purpose? What does that say about them?

Considering gmail has free POP3 access, I don't see what you can do there that you can't do on a more expensive email program. I would say that thumbing your nose at gmail or yahoo or whatever because it's free sounds a little like separating out cars in the lot by whether or not they can afford a vanity license plate.

I guess, ultimately, what does it say about someone for each type of email address?

Company Email
Positive: Very professional and absolutely the right thing to use for some tasks
Negative: This just shouldn't be used for some purposes, as illustrated above

Personal Domain
Positive: Very personalized, shows some tech savvy
Negative: Costs money to register a domain, not everyone has the knowledge to do it; There can also be trademark issues unless you use something like your last name

ISP Email
Positive: Indicates you have internet access
Negative: As QS states, marriage of commercial convenience that is likely temporary

Freemail
Positive: They're frugal and made the decision to have a long lasting email
Negative: They can't afford anything "better"

AOL
Positive: Um... well, you could have had it since the beginning of the commercial internet
Negative: It's AOL

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Marmel

This thread has taken a strange turn. I've both been looking for work and accepting resumes at my job in the last 5 years. I agree that the first part of an email address should be appropriate, but this whole discussion about the second part is bizarre.

Frankly, if I was turned down for a job because I had either comcast.net or gmail.com, I would just say I dodged a bullet in not working for that person.

Originally Posted by molson

I'm with Marmel though - there's been a lot of eye-opening moments for me on FOFC over the years about peculiar hiring practices and what sends someone to the trash immediately. I hope I never work for any of you people.

+1 (tho I see in a greater sense what QS is getting at- it's just frustrating that it is the way that things are)

SI

[Buccaneer]

I only read through the top of this page (sorry) but a question screamed out at me. What the @%$#! is wrong with a cable email address?? The most professional email address with be from a company; next would be a cable (particularly since it is rather costly). Really low on the totem pole, imo, would be those hacky, unsecure, free internet-based mail. Then I guess the lowest would be @facebook.com. That's, of course, assuming you didn't sign up for one of those bogus domain addresses like @icepickilla.net.

To me, a professional or serious acedemic candidate would look silly if I see a gmail or hotmail or something like that. Shows that they are cheap and lazy. If they are using their present employer's domain, then they are untrustworthy. Wouldn't a home address be better than those?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

next would be a cable (particularly since it is rather costly). Really low on the totem pole, imo, would be those hacky, unsecure, free internet-based mail.

Just a note, the last report I read on the subject, majority of users that do use cable/fiber/DSL ISP provided email as their primary email method use the web front end as their primary method of email. Gone are the days where most users actually use outlook or outlook express or some other form of Imap or Pop client (or even secure imap or secure pop).

The majority of the ways that the major free web email provider accounts can be hacked can also be done on cable provided email. Unfortunately in most cases the weak link in breaking into those email accounts generally lie on the user who either practices poor password decisions, or poor computer security decisions.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lordscarlet

Here's, the difference, Jon, since you seem unable to grasp it

No, HERE is the difference, you arrogant SOB.

Neither I, nor QS, attacked anybody at the outset. I only laid it out bluntly after you threw your cheapass jab about "tech savvy" using the f'n webmails.

My point was, then entire GD reason I went into more detail, was to illustrate that not everyone sees that choice as being "tech savvy", there are other perceptions of it.

That was the point I was making & would have been content to leave it pretty generic, but you decided to act like a typical techno prick, so it was time that someone explained how a decent chunk of the rest of the fucking world sees it.

Go through the rest of thread, it's pretty clear I'm not the only person who looks at it that way, hell I'm not even the only one willing to spell some of it out. What I am, however, is one that was willing to tell you to shove your techier-than-thou attitude up your ass.

[RedKingGold]

Angry Jon is angry.

[DanGarion]

I think what this thread is now showing is that those that consider GMail as inferior are behind the times.

Just to take this one step further, if you received something in the mail with a return address of what appears to be a home, apartment, or PO Box, would you discount or hold them in higher regard as well?

[Passacaglia]

After all this, I still don't get in what way having a comcast.net address could be better than gmail. (Honest question, without trying to restart the pissing match, I just don't see it)

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

After all this, I still don't get in what way having a comcast.net address could be better than gmail. (Honest question, without trying to restart the pissing match, I just don't see it)

Honest answer from my viewpoint.
1) Gmail user may not be planning on living here long, he likes gmail portability I may hire him and he move to Florida next week.
2) Gmail user may not have a home or at best not a home computer and very good chance he doesnt have home net access, he may go to local library to access internet. I will give him a laptop but he will need to have home net access to survive in my company.


Again, MOST FOFC members will skew to the higher end of intelligence, and therefor typically skew to the higher income end as well. I and many others are often hiring on the other end. I hired a 19 year within the last year who had never owned, NOR CLAIMED TO HAVE EVER KNOWN PERSONALLY ANYONE who had a home PC. Don't forget there is still a non-net world....

Plus a stated I think Google is the debil.