LinkedIn: How Much Do You Use It?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
Again, with Facebook, sure. I have check-ins, statuses, etc. The reasons for having an account on either site is totally different. It doesn't really matter what LinkedIn set out to be originally. At some point, they saw what they deciphered to be a good logistical move and made it. Again, Facebook and LinkedIn... !=
You are confusing current state with intent. LinkedIn failed at what they set out to do, what you see is them desperately trying to find a way to make money with questionable ethics.
I'm not. So they set out to be a business Facebook. So what? In business, you strive to make money. Method A isn't working. They tried Method B. They may have gathered information originally with a certain purpose in mind but that doesn't make them slight or deceitful. They set out on a course and it didn't work. They changed course. There is nothing dishonest here. Trying something and it not working and then trying something new...what's wrong with that? What are they supposed to do? DBAN all their drives and tell everyone that they were wrong going one way so let's all start over and go another? What you're saying doesn't make sense and you contradict yourself. If they had originally had their current model as the end game and set out in another way to get information sneakily, then that's one thing. You yourself said though that they changed to this when the other didn't work. You honestly sound a little paranoid...
-
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
Again, with Facebook, sure. I have check-ins, statuses, etc. The reasons for having an account on either site is totally different. It doesn't really matter what LinkedIn set out to be originally. At some point, they saw what they deciphered to be a good logistical move and made it. Again, Facebook and LinkedIn... !=
You are confusing current state with intent. LinkedIn failed at what they set out to do, what you see is them desperately trying to find a way to make money with questionable ethics.
I'm not. So they set out to be a business Facebook. So what? In business, you strive to make money. Method A isn't working. They tried Method B. They may have gathered information originally with a certain purpose in mind but that doesn't make them slight or deceitful. They set out on a course and it didn't work. They changed course. There is nothing dishonest here. Trying something and it not working and then trying something new...what's wrong with that? What are they supposed to do? DBAN all their drives and tell everyone that they were wrong going one way so let's all start over and go another? What you're saying doesn't make sense and you contradict yourself. If they had originally had their current model as the end game and set out in another way to get information sneakily, then that's one thing. You yourself said though that they changed to this when the other didn't work. You honestly sound a little paranoid...
Blah blah. You are missing that the data was collected under false pretenses. I would never have agreed to have an account if I knew their intent. I feel that LinkedIn is unethical. They are pieces of poo. They lie about what they are to make a quick buck. Business doesn't have to mean unethical.
-
They kept data from one set of customers and, without informing them, presented it as something else.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
LinkedIn was sold as a way to make business connections with people you knew, not people you didn't know. But to reach them you had to tell LinkedIn certain things. The site was, and is, complete garbage. One of the worst sites ever. To me, worse than MySpace. Just crap.
Ok, but look at it from their perspective. I agree that what they did and still to some degree do, can be classified as data-mining. However, in a business world, you can't afford the same luxuries as just clicking a "friend/connect" button. If I wanted to connect with Bill Gates, wouldn't it make sense that, first, I can verify I know the guy? I agree there are better methods but saying the site is garbage is quite inaccurate and slanderous.
-
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
LinkedIn was sold as a way to make business connections with people you knew, not people you didn't know. But to reach them you had to tell LinkedIn certain things. The site was, and is, complete garbage. One of the worst sites ever. To me, worse than MySpace. Just crap.
Ok, but look at it from their perspective. I agree that what they did and still to some degree do, can be classified as data-mining. However, in a business world, you can't afford the same luxuries as just clicking a "friend/connect" button. If I wanted to connect with Bill Gates, wouldn't it make sense that, first, I can verify I know the guy? I agree there are better methods but saying the site is garbage is quite inaccurate and slanderous.
That's fine. But then taking the verification and producing a "resume" is not ethical. And really, they only "suggest" it is a resume. They rely on, for example, you saying that I put something on my resume that I never did. I'm falsely represented by implication.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
They kept data from one set of customers and, without informing them, presented it as something else.
This is a totally different issue. Once you put the data out there, unless this is something involving financial info (credit cards, bank accounts, etc), legal records (tickets, court rulings, etc) or medical records, it's theirs to do what they want with it. That is implied when joining any site, including this one. ML could take my email and info and, unless I've told them otherwise, use it how they see fit, as long as it's not illegal or destructive.You inherently agree to that when you register on any site.
-
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
They kept data from one set of customers and, without informing them, presented it as something else.
This is a totally different issue. Once you put the data out there, unless this is something involving financial info (credit cards, bank accounts, etc), legal records (tickets, court rulings, etc) or medical records, it's theirs to do what they want with it. That is implied when joining any site, including this one. ML could take my email and info and, unless I've told them otherwise, use it how they see fit, as long as it's not illegal or destructive.You inherently agree to that when you register on any site.
Putting data out there as required for a site to work and then having it presented as something different is not the same as publishing data. I left LinkedIn before there was any suggestion of what you think that it is today.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
LinkedIn was sold as a way to make business connections with people you knew, not people you didn't know. But to reach them you had to tell LinkedIn certain things. The site was, and is, complete garbage. One of the worst sites ever. To me, worse than MySpace. Just crap.
Ok, but look at it from their perspective. I agree that what they did and still to some degree do, can be classified as data-mining. However, in a business world, you can't afford the same luxuries as just clicking a "friend/connect" button. If I wanted to connect with Bill Gates, wouldn't it make sense that, first, I can verify I know the guy? I agree there are better methods but saying the site is garbage is quite inaccurate and slanderous.
That's fine. But then taking the verification and producing a "resume" is not ethical. And really, they only "suggest" it is a resume. They rely on, for example, you saying that I put something on my resume that I never did. I'm falsely represented by implication.
What on earth do you mean? LinkedIn is just like other websites in that it works almost exclusively on the honor system. Being the security nut you are, you should know their main reason for verification. They have no interest in proving your resume is accurate. It isn't their reputation on the line. They present you with the tools to present yourself and you can make of it what you will. They do this to stop spammers. It only makes sense.
Ok, whoa whoa whoa...back the train up.
They rely on, for example, you saying that I put something on my resume that I never did. I'm falsely represented by implication.
Ok, now you're sounding cynical. You're saying LinkedIn is trying to pit us against each other? That makes no sense! Just as in a technical community we call each other out if there are things that are obvious discrepancies, the same goes for LinkedIn.
-
Not much. I only use it primarily as a professional contact Rolodex if you will. Recruiters who contact me through there always are a waste of time. They always have the position filled if you respond, and most of them contact you about jobs that have 0 to do with your skillset.
I visit my account maybe 2-3 times a month, and that's mostly just to look up contact info.
-
You are right though. If I saw something I knew wasn't right on your LinkedIn, I could say something about it. But that's just the whole verification by a community. Besides, you can lie if you want on there. It'll be about as productive, and possibly worse, than lying on your resume. I see where you're coming from but your angle is skewed.
-
@ajstringham said:
That is implied when joining any site, including this one. ML could take my email and info and, unless I've told them otherwise, use it how they see fit, as long as it's not illegal or destructive.You inherently agree to that when you register on any site.Misrepresentation is always unlawful. Claiming that my data represents my statements of where I have worked is untrue. You can collect data. You can't misrepresent it.
-
@Bill-Kindle said:
Not much. I only use it primarily as a professional contact Rolodex if you will. Recruiters who contact me through there always are a waste of time. They always have the position filled if you respond, and most of them contact you about jobs that have 0 to do with your skillset.
I visit my account maybe 2-3 times a month, and that's mostly just to look up contact info.
On this I don't totally disagree. Most are a waste of time but still, some aren't. Those are the nuggets to wait for.
-
@ajstringham said:
You are right though. If I saw something I knew wasn't right on your LinkedIn, I could say something about it. But that's just the whole verification by a community. Besides, you can lie if you want on there. It'll be about as productive, and possibly worse, than lying on your resume. I see where you're coming from but your angle is skewed.
Is it? Or is yours? Your view is based off of data that would have looked normal when collected but now looks skewed because the way it is presented is false. LinkedIn has lied and you feel that my data looks "wrong on a resume". Why would you think it was resume or resume-esqe? I was never told that. It's not me that is skewed. You see LinkedIn as how they want you to see it now, not how it was when the data was input.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
That is implied when joining any site, including this one. ML could take my email and info and, unless I've told them otherwise, use it how they see fit, as long as it's not illegal or destructive.You inherently agree to that when you register on any site.Misrepresentation is always unlawful. Claiming that my data represents my statements of where I have worked is untrue. You can collect data. You can't misrepresent it.
I agree that it's unlawful but how do they misrepresent data? You fill in
- work history
- job descriptions
- accomplishments in life, work, education
All those are things that go on a resume. Besides, LinkedIn isn't adding information to what you put. They haven't gone on my profile and added that I graduated medical school to make me look better. They take what you give them and arrange it in a pretty fashion. No misrepresentation of the facts, just making the display a bit more flashy.
-
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
That is implied when joining any site, including this one. ML could take my email and info and, unless I've told them otherwise, use it how they see fit, as long as it's not illegal or destructive.You inherently agree to that when you register on any site.Misrepresentation is always unlawful. Claiming that my data represents my statements of where I have worked is untrue. You can collect data. You can't misrepresent it.
I agree that it's unlawful but how do they misrepresent data? You fill in
- work history
- job descriptions
- accomplishments in life, work, education
All those are things that go on a resume. Besides, LinkedIn isn't adding information to what you put. They haven't gone on my profile and added that I graduated medical school to make me look better. They take what you give them and arrange it in a pretty fashion. No misrepresentation of the facts, just making the display a bit more flashy.
They present it as that, but you had to fill in "how do you know people" at the time. You can see that I didn't fill in work history, that was obvious.
-
And yes, I presented this breach of ethics when I spoke to LinkedIn directly to. They are a horrid company.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
You are right though. If I saw something I knew wasn't right on your LinkedIn, I could say something about it. But that's just the whole verification by a community. Besides, you can lie if you want on there. It'll be about as productive, and possibly worse, than lying on your resume. I see where you're coming from but your angle is skewed.
Is it? Or is yours? Your view is based off of data that would have looked normal when collected but now looks skewed because the way it is presented is false. LinkedIn has lied and you feel that my data looks "wrong on a resume". Why would you think it was resume or resume-esqe? I was never told that. It's not me that is skewed. You see LinkedIn as how they want you to see it now, not how it was when the data was input.
Ok, so tell me this. You said it was supposed to be the "business Facebook". Ok, so you have businesses/employers marketing to each other and to current and future employees. That sounds a lot like a job fair, where I always bring my resumes. When I filled in my profile several years ago, I knew what the purpose was. I still think you're hung up on the fact that, and I can't say this for certain as I wasn't a member yet, LinkedIn changed their objective. Even if they did, people who didn't like the new direction have the opportunity to withdraw from the site/remove their account. At THAT point, when willing registration has been revoked, LinkedIn can't touch their data anymore. If they stay on, they are consenting to the new direction it's going and again, we have no issue.
I don't see where this misrepresented data-mining idea is coming from. I'm willing to listen. Going off what you said though, no matter how you slice it, people who want to be there will be and those who don't can leave. If they just don't use the account and never remove it, that's on the user, not LinkedIn, anymore than letting a credit card that had been used but you weren't going to use anymore not get paid and just sit there accruing interest and penalties each month. It's not Discover's fault or Visa's fault. It'd be the cardholder's. Same story.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
That is implied when joining any site, including this one. ML could take my email and info and, unless I've told them otherwise, use it how they see fit, as long as it's not illegal or destructive.You inherently agree to that when you register on any site.Misrepresentation is always unlawful. Claiming that my data represents my statements of where I have worked is untrue. You can collect data. You can't misrepresent it.
I agree that it's unlawful but how do they misrepresent data? You fill in
- work history
- job descriptions
- accomplishments in life, work, education
All those are things that go on a resume. Besides, LinkedIn isn't adding information to what you put. They haven't gone on my profile and added that I graduated medical school to make me look better. They take what you give them and arrange it in a pretty fashion. No misrepresentation of the facts, just making the display a bit more flashy.
They present it as that, but you had to fill in "how do you know people" at the time. You can see that I didn't fill in work history, that was obvious.
Business. Connections. People. When they ask how you know people, they are partly trying to search for others who have NTG as their employer and partly helping to filter spammers. Just imagine for a minute if there was no verification on LinkedIn. The way you've talked so far, all the verification is bad. Ok, so we rip all that out. Suddenly, a place that was, as you said, supposed to be business-minded and in a business atmosphere, it now has people on it equivalent to the people on Facebook who have 2,000 friends, most of whom they don't know but a friend's friend's friend's friend's uncle's sister knows. It falls into chaos and is now no different, in any way, from Facebook. That verification can be irritating but it's a necessary part of keeping business community separate from Facebook community.
-
@ajstringham said:
So a couple months ago I updated my LinkedIn profile page so that it didn't, well, suck. It was pretty deplorable before but now it's quite good. I have a link to a Youtube video of my presentation at Spiceworld Austin 2013, a scanned in copy of one of my letters from the President's office at Staples and tons of other stuff. It has been working, as far as people noticing. A large number of the job recruiters who contact me find me on LinkedIn. I didn't used to see the value in it but, as of late, I have. Has anyone had any amazing experiences because of it? I actually am focusing on keep it looking good and adding as much as I can to it.
If anyone wants to connect, here's me: https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=165398934
Connection request sent. I don't use LinkedIn but am interested in any tool that can get me a better job, so need to look into it. I really don't know what @scottalanmiller's beef is. Social networks adapt and evolve. Facebook was originally a way to connect Harvard students together, it's now a way for Coca Cola to advertise to farmers in Namibia. Who cares? If you don't like what's it become why don't you just delete your profile? I don't get it.
As an introvert, social networks really don't appeal to me - business or social. I've never had someone offer me a job on LinkedIn and most of the connection requests I get are from people trying to sell me something, which has no appeal whatsoever.
Any tips on making it work for me would be most appreciated. I guess you need to join a few groups? I joined a virtualisation one, but it was pretty poor compared with the Spiceworks forum, so never bothered with it.
Regards
Carnival Boy
Son of Chartered Accountant, Author and University Lecturer 1972-2014 (42 years). -
@Carnival-Boy said:
business or social. I've never had someone offer me a job on LinkedIn and most of the connection requests I get are from people trying to sell me something, which has no appeal whatsoever.
The groups are a joke. If you use it just to keep up with pro's you've networked with in the past and need to reference them quickly, LinkedIn is good for that. For me, it replaced the business card folder I had.
