If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mashable)   And they better not ask for my Fark log-in, either   (mashable.com) divider line 64
    More: Obvious, drunk driving  
•       •       •

6382 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Dec 2012 at 7:23 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-30 06:05:28 PM  
Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.
 
2012-12-30 06:19:58 PM  

fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.


I can agree with this.  Your credit rating isn't 100% telling about you as an individual.  Lots of situations outside your control can wreck your credit.

I understand we need a credit rating system (though I think it needs an overhaul, but that's for another thread) for people who are directly applying for credit.  But for a job, apartment, etc.?  No.
 
2012-12-30 07:26:00 PM  
It's ********

Of course it comes out as just asterisks when I put it in a thread.

Now you try it...
 
2012-12-30 07:26:14 PM  
Just give them a fake login, or tell them you don't have an account. Why is this such a problem?
 
2012-12-30 07:26:41 PM  

fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.


California requires the potential employer to get your written permission to do a credit check.  I have NEVER given permission and I never will.  Nor will I ever give anyone my login for anything online.
 
2012-12-30 07:30:58 PM  

OgreMagi: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

California requires the potential employer to get your written permission to do a credit check.  I have NEVER given permission and I never will.  Nor will I ever give anyone my login for anything online.


Regarding the credit check, you'll never have a security clearance, either. That likely doesn't matter to you, buy it does to some. As for the social sites, they can suck it.
 
2012-12-30 07:33:41 PM  

fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.


Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.
 
2012-12-30 07:36:05 PM  
Don't even give them your Social Security number.
They can have it when they start depositing into your SS account, not before.
 
2012-12-30 07:39:31 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.


Possibly because it's none of your business.
 
2012-12-30 07:41:27 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.


my 2 pennies: most positions this logic doesn't apply, it's just the shiat eating grin a Personnel dooshbag would feed a prospective. i'd agree with you for positions of importance and where access to accounts, cash, ledgers and script pads among other things come into play. most folks will never have a fancy schmancy position in their lives, they are just everyday shmoes. it's too often dicking with people for the sake of it. few people don't abuse the privilege of power - all the more reason to safeguard ones personal matters. also, there is a learning curve for young people in life. we should be able to make and learn from our Miss Steaks.
 
2012-12-30 07:44:48 PM  

downstairs: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

I can agree with this.  Your credit rating isn't 100% telling about you as an individual.  Lots of situations outside your control can wreck your credit.

I understand we need a credit rating system (though I think it needs an overhaul, but that's for another thread) for people who are directly applying for credit.  But for a job, apartment, etc.?  No.


The only real situation outside of your control that can wreck your credit is being a victim of identity theft. There are plenty of other unfortunate things that can happen which can lead to credit problems, but they all boil down to either choosing not to, or not being able to pay your bills and financial obligations, which are under your control.

When it comes into play for job applications it should only matter if the job being applied for will put you in direct control of a lot of company money. A credit check when applying to be a loan officer at a bank makes sense, one to be a teacher probably doesn't.

For an apartment (or cell phone plan, satellite TV service, etc) it makes some sense. Evictions take time and money, and every month you occupy an apartment without paying for it you are preventing the landlord from being able to rent it out to someone who will. When you buy a cell phone or sign up for satellite TV you are given the hardware at a greatly subsidized price, or even free, with the understanding that you will pay for the service over the contracted time to allow the company to recoup the cost of giving you the hardware up front. In any of those cases it makes sense to check and see if you pay your bills or not.
 
2012-12-30 07:45:02 PM  
Its amazing that they even need to pass a law to protect peoples privacy online. Oh wait there are already laws that are ignored because war against terrorism or something.


//F*cking sheeple would hand over their first born(preferably a male and about 6-9 years old) to the preacher down the road if it could get them a job.
 
2012-12-30 07:45:48 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.


and that is why you are part of the problem
 
2012-12-30 07:47:12 PM  

Marshall Willenholly: Just give them a fake login, or tell them you don't have an account. Why is this such a problem?


Have you ever met an HR drone?

Drone: "No Facebook? We don't hire antisocial shut-ins."
 
2012-12-30 07:47:32 PM  

Cormee: ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.

Possibly because it's none of your business.


And because in 95% of jobs it has absolutely no bearing on what kind of employee you will be.
 
2012-12-30 07:48:35 PM  

Marshall Willenholly: Just give them a fake login, or tell them you don't have an account. Why is this such a problem?


No problem but you won't get the job.

Seriously, businesses, or I should say people, are that idiotic.
 
2012-12-30 07:48:41 PM  

spentshells: ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.

and that is why you are part of the problem


So he gives a solid argument and the best you can do is clamp your hands on your ears and go "I'm not listening!"
 
2012-12-30 07:49:02 PM  
I can't believe that this kind of thing is necessary- I mean, firstly who has the balls to even ask for that kind of thing, and second, who gives it up?

My answer would be "hah, no. And I don't think I'll be coming to work for a place that has that kind of policy. Goodbye."
 
2012-12-30 07:58:09 PM  
Really, who came up with this gay shiat anyway?


fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.


Yeah! and add a ban to car insurance companies charging you more for having bad credit or being divorced. I asked an insurance lady once "so does me having bad credit and being divorced make me more likely to get depressed and ram my car into a brick wall?" and she just laughed.

farking insurance companies *shakes fist*
 
2012-12-30 07:58:38 PM  

Cormee: ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.

Possibly because it's none of your business.


It's already the business of dozens of other businesses who hold and have contributed to your credit score.
 
2012-12-30 07:59:16 PM  
The fact that these laws have not caught up with the employers' trashing privacy in the workplace is a major reason I work for myself. While I understand that certain types of info may be relevant to the job one performs, at the same time it does not apply to all. However, in the ever increasing employee beat down of corporate America (and world), the whole idea of gathering the necessary info so you can be fired later begins even before you get hired.

Its farking pathetic. Even more pathetic is that companies still get away with it.
 
2012-12-30 08:00:21 PM  
Ok, so the law prohibits employers from asking for your login information. Seems like they could get around that by demanding that you log in to your Facebook account and then let them browse around, or at least you log in and browse around while they stand over your shoulder and watch.
 
2012-12-30 08:00:46 PM  

OgreMagi: California requires the potential employer to get your written permission to do a credit check. I have NEVER given permission and I never will. Nor will I ever give anyone my login for anything online.


Since 2012 they can't ask for most jobs in California. Why? With 10% unemployment last thing we need is employers denying jobs to people who've gone bankrupt.
 
2012-12-30 08:01:07 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

POOR PEOPLE STEAL!

Put what you really mean.
 
2012-12-30 08:01:15 PM  

Bill_Wick's_Friend: It's ********

Of course it comes out as just asterisks when I put it in a thread.

Now you try it...


ilovemidget69
 
2012-12-30 08:01:58 PM  

Bill_Wick's_Friend: It's ********

Of course it comes out as just asterisks when I put it in a thread.

Now you try it...


Hey, it didn't work.
 
2012-12-30 08:02:21 PM  

gibbon1: OgreMagi: California requires the potential employer to get your written permission to do a credit check. I have NEVER given permission and I never will. Nor will I ever give anyone my login for anything online.

Since 2012 they can't ask for most jobs in California. Why? With 10% unemployment last thing we need is employers denying jobs to people who've gone bankrupt.


I did not know they had tightened up the restrictions even more.  Good.
 
2012-12-30 08:03:53 PM  
Michigan passed a bill on Friday that prohibits employers and schools from asking employees and students for login information to their personal social media accounts.

/Good for them, I wouldn't know what to say if a prospective employer asked me for my personal facebook logon, or email, or some such private info. I would probably say, sure,,ill give you that, ..you just give me yours first. No? Then fark you you intrusive prick.
 
2012-12-30 08:07:10 PM  

fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.


They make sense where an employee has access to company assets and debt would be a motive for stealing or make one easily susceptible to bribing.

/ Had a security clearance
// Had to keep my life squeaky clean
 
2012-12-30 08:09:05 PM  

gibbon1: OgreMagi: California requires the potential employer to get your written permission to do a credit check. I have NEVER given permission and I never will. Nor will I ever give anyone my login for anything online.

Since 2012 they can't ask for most jobs in California. Why? With 10% unemployment last thing we need is employers denying jobs to people who've gone bankrupt.


You don't need to do a credit check for bankruptcies. They're Federal court records, available free online.
 
2012-12-30 08:09:25 PM  
While I agree with the spirit of the law I question the necessity of it. If the employer asks just deny that you use social media. How would they know otherwise? Unless you are idiotic enough to use your real name on the internet, in which case you get what you deserve.
 
2012-12-30 08:11:29 PM  
Instead of the current peeing contest, why can't congress pass comprehensive privacy rights?

Not only should they be law, but they should be amended into the constitution.
 
2012-12-30 08:11:58 PM  
Points and laughs as madman drummers bummers' calliope crashes to the ground
 
2012-12-30 08:21:00 PM  

Kaiku: Ok, so the law prohibits employers from asking for your login information. Seems like they could get around that by demanding that you log in to your Facebook account and then let them browse around, or at least you log in and browse around while they stand over your shoulder and watch.


They could. At which point in the interview I look at him and say "Are you serious?" If he says "Yes", that's walking time.
Do you really want to work for a company that starts off on that level? It will only get worse.
 
2012-12-30 08:21:14 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: downstairs: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

I can agree with this.  Your credit rating isn't 100% telling about you as an individual.  Lots of situations outside your control can wreck your credit.

I understand we need a credit rating system (though I think it needs an overhaul, but that's for another thread) for people who are directly applying for credit.  But for a job, apartment, etc.?  No.

The only real situation outside of your control that can wreck your credit is being a victim of identity theft. There are plenty of other unfortunate things that can happen which can lead to credit problems, but they all boil down to either choosing not to, or not being able to pay your bills and financial obligations, which are under your control.

When it comes into play for job applications it should only matter if the job being applied for will put you in direct control of a lot of company money. A credit check when applying to be a loan officer at a bank makes sense, one to be a teacher probably doesn't.

For an apartment (or cell phone plan, satellite TV service, etc) it makes some sense. Evictions take time and money, and every month you occupy an apartment without paying for it you are preventing the landlord from being able to rent it out to someone who will. When you buy a cell phone or sign up for satellite TV you are given the hardware at a greatly subsidized price, or even free, with the understanding that you will pay for the service over the contracted time to allow the company to recoup the cost of giving you the hardware up front. In any of those cases it makes sense to check and see if you pay your bills or not.


That's really not true at all.  (The part about "The only real situation outside of your control that can wreck your credit is being a victim of identity theft.")

First of all, health issues can totally screw you.  Hospital with no insurance?  Does this mean you'd make a bad employee?

Second... you've ran a successful business for a decade and the economy screwed you.  This is something I have personal experience with (knowing people going through it, that is).  With a small business, you're often tied personally to your debt.  And its not exactly simple to just divorce yourself from it and not have it effect your credit.  At the same time it doesn't *necessarily* tell the story of how good of an employee you'd be.

I know deadbeats who have gone through bankrupcy.  As well I know perfectly good people- people smart with their money- who have gone through bankrupcy.  Both are catirogized the same.  (Which is my problem with the "one number" credit rating system).

The part I bolded is important.  "choosing not to" and "not being able to" are two vastly different things.  Yet we have a system that categorizes both the same.
 
2012-12-30 08:25:12 PM  

Bill_Wick's_Friend: Points and laughs as madman drummers bummers' calliope crashes to the ground


He was blinded by the light...
 
2012-12-30 08:27:45 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.


Your credit score is by far nowhere near a good way to determine someone's money managing skills.  People who are excellent at budgeting go bankrupt all the time.

So do deadbeats, of course.  But that doesn't negate my previous statement.

I totally get where you're going in concept.  But in practice it doesn't work.
 
2012-12-30 08:31:40 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.



That's some really dull logic. Your concept is shaky at best, and the application of such a concept is quite useless. You may as well say "we won't hire young people because most theft is committed by them and they are a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information... blah blah blah"

Your bottom line can suck my right to privacy's big, fat ****
 
2012-12-30 08:33:01 PM  

ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.


Also, remember the purpose of bankrupcy is to give the person a good shot at a second chance.  Allowing potential employers, landlords, etc. to see that information sort of negates the entire purpose.  I have no problem with being someone being denied credit based on a bad credit score because of bankrupcy.  And a security clearance is totally fair game- the can gather as much info as they want IMHO.
 
2012-12-30 08:37:09 PM  

jaytkay: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

They make sense where an employee has access to company assets and debt would be a motive for stealing or make one easily susceptible to bribing.

/ Had a security clearance
// Had to keep my life squeaky clean


So what you're saying is that because there's a correlation between debt and criminal activity it's right to not hire someone with a poor credit score? Remember that correlation != causation. There is also a correlation between renting an dwelling and committing theft, does that mean you shouldn't hire someone who rents?
 
2012-12-30 08:50:18 PM  

The Only Sane Man In Florida: jaytkay: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

They make sense where an employee has access to company assets and debt would be a motive for stealing or make one easily susceptible to bribing.

/ Had a security clearance
// Had to keep my life squeaky clean

So what you're saying is that because there's a correlation between debt and criminal activity it's right to not hire someone with a poor credit score? Remember that correlation != causation. There is also a correlation between renting an dwelling and committing theft, does that mean you shouldn't hire someone who rents?


If you have to choose among equally qualified applicants? Of course. Duh.

"Sorry, guy-with-a-motive-to-rob-me. The position is filled!"
 
2012-12-30 08:50:30 PM  

The Only Sane Man In Florida: jaytkay: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

They make sense where an employee has access to company assets and debt would be a motive for stealing or make one easily susceptible to bribing.

/ Had a security clearance
// Had to keep my life squeaky clean

So what you're saying is that because there's a correlation between debt and criminal activity it's right to not hire someone with a poor credit score? Remember that correlation != causation. There is also a correlation between renting an dwelling and committing theft, does that mean you shouldn't hire someone who rents?


As someone who used to rent (many years ago) and has worked with many people who own rental properties, I can testify that most renters are scum. I have no problem passing judgement on somebody (deciding whether or not to enter a contractual business agreement) based on whether they own or rent, among other factors.
 
2012-12-30 08:52:16 PM  
FTA an employer or institution cannot require that you provide them with your username or passwords

However, if you choose not to, your outlook is slim for getting hired.
 
2012-12-30 08:56:33 PM  

The Only Sane Man In Florida: So what you're saying is that because there's a correlation between debt and criminal activity it's right to not hire someone with a poor credit score? Remember that correlation != causation. There is also a correlation between renting an dwelling and committing theft, does that mean you shouldn't hire someone who rents?


When it comes to a question of "is this person likely to be a good employee", correlation is all that matters. I don't care why factor X has a high correlation with someone being a bad employee, I just care that it does.
 
2012-12-30 09:00:35 PM  

ArmednHammered: Bill_Wick's_Friend: Points and laughs as madman drummers bummers' calliope crashes to the ground

He was blinded by the light...


Wrapped up like a duce and a runner in the night
 
2012-12-30 09:03:02 PM  

downstairs: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

I can agree with this.  Your credit rating isn't 100% telling about you as an individual.  Lots of situations outside your control can wreck your credit.

I understand we need a credit rating system (though I think it needs an overhaul, but that's for another thread) for people who are directly applying for credit.  But for a job, apartment, etc.?  No.


Out of curiosity, outside of someone stealing your credit, what?
 
2012-12-30 09:07:05 PM  

reillan: downstairs: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

I can agree with this.  Your credit rating isn't 100% telling about you as an individual.  Lots of situations outside your control can wreck your credit.

I understand we need a credit rating system (though I think it needs an overhaul, but that's for another thread) for people who are directly applying for credit.  But for a job, apartment, etc.?  No.

Out of curiosity, outside of someone stealing your credit, what?


You ever extend credit to someone? Rent an apartment to somebody? Give a stranger a loan?

/ I didn't think so.
 
2012-12-30 09:14:14 PM  

downstairs: downstairs: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

That's really not true at all. (The part about "The only real situation outside of your control that can wreck your credit is being a victim of identity theft.")

First of all, health issues can totally screw you. Hospital with no insurance? Does this mean you'd make a bad employee?

Second... you've ran a successful business for a decade and the economy screwed you. This is something I have personal experience with (knowing people going through it, that is). With a small business, you're often tied personally to your debt. And its not exactly simple to just divorce yourself from it and not have it effect your credit. At the same time it doesn't *necessarily* tell the story of how good of an employee you'd be.

I know deadbeats who have gone through bankrupcy. As well I know perfectly good people- people smart with their money- who have gone through bankrupcy. Both are catirogized the same. (Which is my problem with the "one number" credit rating system).

The part I bolded is important. "choosing not to" and "not being able to" are two vastly different things. Yet we have a system that categorizes both the same.


Unexpected medical bills and business downturns due to the economy are both things that can be prepared for. It's irresponsible to not have some form of health insurance. Many people don't have it, many people can't afford it, and out entire health insurance system is a big pile of garbage, but it's fiscally prudent to carry coverage. Getting hit with huge hospital bills due to no insurance and then not paying them are both things that are in an individual's control.

The same thing applies to business downturns. Yes, the economy crashing hurt a lot of people and a lot of businesses, but those businesses that hadn't overextended themselves were able to weather the storm. Taking on too much debt and/or not maintaining enough in liquid asset reserves are both things that are preventable.

The reasons people don't pay their debts are numerous, and some are even laudable - given the choice between putting food on the table for your family or paying a huge bill to the hospital it's understandble to take care of your family first, ditto when it comes to buying clothes for your kids or paying for the order of widgets that came in right before demand cratered for your product. At the end of the day though the system shows those who pay the debts they incur and those that don't, which is all that matters in the eyes of many places you'll do business with. Your company won't care if you embezzle $10,000 to fly your secretary to Cabo or if you do it to pay for a life saving operation for your toddler.
 
2012-12-30 09:42:40 PM  

The Only Sane Man In Florida: ramblinwreck: fusillade762: Good. Now they just need to ban pre-employment credit checks.

Uh, what? This is done by some companies and government agencies to make sure you don't have huge amounts of delinquent or excessive debt because you'd be a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information (or classified info) to competitors (or governments). If I was an employer, I'd sure as hell would like to know who doesn't have good money management skills and could be a threat to MY bottom line. Please enlighten me on your rationale for opposing it.


That's some really dull logic. Your concept is shaky at best, and the application of such a concept is quite useless. You may as well say "we won't hire young people because most theft is committed by them and they are a credible risk for theft of employer property or risk of selling proprietary information... blah blah blah"

Your bottom line can suck my right to privacy's big, fat ****


Sounds like you'd be very employable. /sarcasm

FWIW, I'm active duty and have no skin in the game.

You'd be OK with someone having access to information that could gravely harm the United States if they sold that information to foreign governments? Credit and background checks exist for a reason. Sadly, they're reactionary...as in people with excessive debt or were severly delinquent sold government assets for personal gain. (Granted, people without huge debt could and have done the same thing.)

As for young people, I'd have to know the numbers. So, I'm speculating that the amount they steal and the cheapness of their labor and general good health offset in favor of their employment.
 
2012-12-30 10:07:37 PM  
So now, if you do something stupid on one of those sites, it's truly your own fault.

Nifty.

Honestly I'd never heard of this requirement being made of employees or schoolchildren...
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report