Quoting Jesse Zbikowski (embeddedlinuxguy@gmail.com):
Maybe we could also direct job posters to the sf-lug info page http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
Let's talk about that.
It might be doing no favour to SF-LUG, since a recruiter who ignores BALUG's terse bold-text guideline is unlikely to heed SF-LUG's less prominent and more verbose one to send jobs postings to jim@well.com .
More to the point, IMO, your suggestion is mostly redundant to what we already do. Why do I say that? Because the hyperlink from balug-talk's listinfo page (http://lists.balug.org/listinfo.cgi/balug-talk-balug.org) to 'SVLUG Jobs' is to a page with a _comprehensive_ list of places to send Linux jobs postings in the Bay Area, and item #6 of 13 on that list is 'SF-LUG [link] accepts jobs postings via the listadmin'.
I am intimately familiar with that page and its contents (http://lists.svlug.org/lists/listinfo/jobs), because I maintain it.
Frankly, I think that SF-LUG link, with a reminder that SF-LUG accepts jobs postings _via the listadmin_, is inherently to be preferred to sending people directly to the SF-LUG listinfo page, which is a bit less clear and invites more of these 'I apologise in advance if I made a mistake' dances.
This seems like the most appropriate place for San Francisco-based Linux developer jobs, since SVLUG is for the valley and BayLisa is for sysadmins.
Well, as a data point, I might point out that the Cisco guy was advertising a _San Jose_ software engineering job, and that this is, in my experience, pretty typical of the recruiters who come charging in and ignoring BALUG's mailing list rules.
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com wrote:
Well, as a data point, I might point out that the Cisco guy was advertising a _San Jose_ software engineering job
That's true, and interesting to note that he couldn't even be bothered to include this information in his posting. Personally I am non-plussed at how many recruiters don't bother to communicate where the job actually is. I don't know that there are any geographical restrictions for sf-lug job posts, but it would be good practice to include the city in the subject line or the first few lines of the body. Just my two cents.
Quoting Jesse Zbikowski (embeddedlinuxguy@gmail.com):
That's true, and interesting to note that he couldn't even be bothered to include this information in his posting. Personally I am non-plussed at how many recruiters don't bother to communicate where the job actually is. I don't know that there are any geographical restrictions for sf-lug job posts, but it would be good practice to include the city in the subject line or the first few lines of the body. Just my two cents.
FWIW, I've also managed SVLUG's Jobs mailing list for quite a few years, and one of its rules is that all postings for full-time positions must be for jobs within 75 miles of San Jose. One of the most frequent reasons listadmins rejecting postings to that mailing list is recruiters failing to include location at all. (Postings that refer readers to a URL for details get immediately rejected, because the listadmins need to vet postings from the Mailman interface, and so postings are expected to be self-contained.)
SVLUG's experience at the time (see qualifier below) was that it was impractical to permit jobs postings in the main Linux discussion mailing list under any rules whatsoever, because a large number of recruiters would always just ignore any rules and 'apologise in advance'. (I should stress that it's just _some_ recruiters. I really feel for the careful and diligent ones.)
The SVLUG listadmins eventually not only created a separated, dedicated Jobs list, but also discovered the hard way that it had to be fully moderated.
(Most of the badness occurred during the dot-com explosion of business, in fairness.)