[Gllug] VACANCY: Site Reliability Engineering

[John G Walker]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:53:59 -0500 Balbir Thomas
<balbir.thomas at gmail.com> wrote:

> What I ment in your own words is, as you rightly yourself point out
> (and I also noted it in myprevious email), an "artifact". Why would
> you take an "artifact" as a conclusion and then spread it around as
> an "urban myth". In this case a myth spread by inaccurately
> representing the real implication of that data.

I don't know why anyone would spread a myth. That wasn't the point of
my post. Perhaps someone else on the list is an expert in these matters.

> 
> I do not see where i have been unclear in what I said, please do not
> hesitate to ask a more specific question. From what I understand of
> what you are saying, is that you DO appreciate that the statement
>  "salaries drop at or above the Ph.D level" is a misleading
> interpretation (i.e. "artifact") of the data.

Not only do I appreciate this. This was the point of my post. If you ad
stopped here, then I woudl have assumed that that you'd sent a "me too"
post.

> All I am saying, is that in view of this fact to continue to make
> such claims would imply that you DO NOT appreciate the significance
> of what it means to be an "artifact".

This is where it gets weird. What claims are these? This is the bit that
is confusing. You seem to be saying my point is wrong because it's
right,

-- 
 All the best,
 John
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug