If you were deciding between job candidates

[Creepy-]

The situation: you're in charge of hiring a new employee. After interviewing several, you narrow it down to two women of equal qualifications. As you look through their info, you realize that the email address provided by one of the women is something like "sexybaby@email.com" while the other is something like "josephineschmoe@email.com." Does this affect your decision about which one you hire?

[Creepy-bg]

not at all.

[Creepy-bg]

actually, I'd probably consider sexybaby as a more interesting employee (not meaning this in a sexual way). I wouldn't base my decision between them on it though.

[Creepy-]

not at all.

actually, I'd probably consider sexybaby as a more interesting employee (not meaning this in a sexual way). I wouldn't base my decision between them on it though.

Really? Would it make a difference to you if it was a very high-profile position you were hiring for?

[Tom]

Nerp. I'm with BG.

[Creepy-bg]

Really? Would it make a difference to you if it was a very high-profile position you were hiring for?

I wouldn't be hiring for those sorts of positions (I've only done interviews and made the decision on hiring people who were going to be under me, a part of my team). But if I was in the position to do so, no, it wouldn't make any difference to me (provided that there wasn't some sort of policy on it that I was supposed to be following, even then, I would probably ignore it ) . I don't think that using Sexybaby@email.com says anything about a persons credentials for a position. I might even see it as a sign of balls and confidence in themselves that they used that email address for a resume.

at the same time, I do see how it's a bit stupid to be using it on a resume... it's not very professional and I'd assume that most, if not all, human resource departments would see it as a bad mark against the applicant. IMO though, skills in creating applications mean nothing when it comes to actual skills in the workplace. A monkey can be trained to produce an acceptable professional application.

[Not A Communist Shill]

It shouldn't make a difference if the candidates are indeed equally qualified for the job. But...to put "sexybaby@email.com" as your email address shows poor lack of judgement. If they were to do something similar with your company...well, I suppose it depends on what kind of company it is. I think ultimately, you would have to contact this person and ask them why they used this particular email address...and if they can satisfactorily bullshit their way out of it, give them the job! But it would seem foolish or blase to put that as your email address.

[them]

For someone to have actually gotten a name such as sexybaby, it's highly likely that they were one of the first to sign up, and thus one of the first to know about the website. To me this could imply that they were long time users of the internet and had many years of experience with computers, or kept up to date with new technology, and also that they have what some South Americans refer to as mucho grande cojones for using such an email for something work-related. Perhaps she was purposefully using that email to see if it would affect her chances, thinking that any employer that would treat her differently because of it is one she would not want to work for. And maybe she would put a voodoo hex curse on my company for not hiring her. And maybe I just happen to believe in voodoo hex curses and will put one on her for putting one on me, and the world will erupt in a war of voodoo hex curse casting, all over a simple job. That just seems petty, to me, and a total waste of not only time, but curse casting powder as well, and that shit ain't cheap.

[marooned]

I think it would depend on things I gathered meeting "sexybaby". I would be curious as to why she would put that as her email when it could deter someone from hiring her (and that question would actually be more interesting to me than any connotations/implications of the email address). Also I would presumably have her references, and I would have already met her and I think that whatever information was gathered there would outweigh something like her email address. Not to mention that the email address doesn't bother me anyway. I guess the point of the matter is I don't know why she chose that as an email address or why she gave it with her information, and unless it links up with several others questions I had about her in the back of my mind leading to some profound revelation that she's a back-stabbing slut or a naive dunce, or someone who will sail us all into ruin, I would probably just go off the information I do have (as there could be any number of reasons for that email address). Basically whatever reason it is either falls inside the concept of what I already know of her (in which case there is a reason for it that makes sense within the scope of her being close to the person she so far seems to be), or it falls outside of it, thereby leading to re-evaluating who she really is. All in all though I tend to be of the "I won't discriminate against you because you have a tattoo, a nose ring, dyed your hair green, and chose iamaslut.com for your website" variety because I tend to be very socially liberal in general and I just don't care what her email address is, only who she is, and her email address shouldn't change that. Of course, if the job is the exact opposite of a socially liberal sort of place, then she'll have to be informed she can't use that email address at work. But I mean I really don't like limits on these sorts of things at all.

[Bardia]

It depends on how she answered my question of why she chose that email.

[The Greeter]

If I am able to hire both women, instead of asking the woman why her e-mail was 'sexybaby', which would be none of my business, I would simply request that she use a more professional username for work.

But if I had to choose one, though it would be difficult considering the equality in their merits, I would choose the one who was more careful about professionalism. Less trouble, is it not?

I'm imagining now the reason I would give if the other women had called to ask why she wasn't hired and to say: "your e-mail was inappropriate" seems like such an absurd reason. Explaining to her the situation would lessen the absurdity, I think, but I would feel a little bad. I mean, it could have been just a small slip-up. On the other hand, at least I would have made her aware of such things and, if the hired rival did not work out, sexybaby would definitely get the job, if she was still interested.

This is written assuming that we cannot consult other colleagues and the decision is ours alone to make.

[717495]

Nah, I would just hire the one that's truly sexier. You can't trust internet.

[Creepy-bg]

Nah, I would just hire the one that's truly sexier. You can't trust internet.

lol

[Creepy-]

Wow - I'm kind of surprised by these answers, actually.

I went to a job interview today and saw a list with two other interviewees. One woman had written down a "sexybaby"-type email address. I was appalled. I mean, this was a pretty good job we were interviewing for [and in HR administration - oh, the irony]. If I was in charge of reviewing candidates and saw an email address like that, my eyebrows would raise and I would have serious doubts, if not about the person's qualifications then about their sense of professionalism. But that's just me, I guess.

[The Exception]

If sexybaby@email.com were applying to somewhere like a strip joint, her choice of email may give her something of an advantage. :wink:


But seriously, if I was the one doing the hiring, I doubt it would make much difference one way or another. I would pay more attention to whether or not the candidate would be a good fit for the job in terms of work experience and interest in the job.

However, in today's economy, the job market is very tight in many fields and having 100 or more applicants for a job is not at all unusual. With only a handful who will earn an interview, recruiters can afford to be picky and use details such as choice of email address or the number of typos on a resume as a reason to discard an application.

[FDG]

I'd choose the hotter one.

[ProcrastinateTomorrow]

The one with the normal email address without a doubt.

The is a great deal of unprofessionalism providing a email like that to your future employer.

I would prefer that she didn't put anything I wouldn't judge her for having not put a email.

[redbaron]

that's unprofessional.

[Jarno]

ONLY if I were the boss in a one man company and had to hire a second person, and I'm single at the moment. Yes I would influence me.

In ALL the other cases I would go for the other one. I rather have a boring serious person who does her work well, then miss sexy babe who's on msn all day.

[Wynch]

Wow, I'm also really surprised by the responses here. While an email adderss may seem inconsequential, there are a hell of a lot of applicants to professional jobs, especially ones that don't require very specific specialization. If I'm going through resumes for a professional position, and I have a hundred applications, I probably wouldn't make it past the email address before I tossed the resume aside. Honestly, how much effort does it take to have a professional email address? It's a small thing to do, and not doing it tells me one of two things. Either you don't understand the basics of professionalism, which is a huge mark against someone trying to get a professional job [Hello, HR?]. Or you know and you either don't care enough to fix it or are too lazy to fix it, in which case, how can I trust you to care enough when you're actually working for me. An employee's behaviour reflects on both the employer and the organization.

This isn't a trick question, it's commonsense. Professionalism 101. Regardless of whether you want people to filter based on those types of things, it's simply reality that people are judging you based on the impressions you give. You wouldn't wear a shirt that says "sexy baby" to work (and if you did people would probably be appalled). That's just reality. I'm really surprised that person made it to an interview, song.

[marooned]

My answer was based on this:

After interviewing several, you narrow it down to two women of equal qualifications.

which means I've already interviewed her, correct? I mean the time for me to throw out applicants based on their email address would be before interviews, but if I've already interviewed her then it's difficult to place more importance on her email address than on what I gathered during the interview. And if I didn't notice her email address before the interviewing process, I might think of it as one of those "amusing things in life" where someone who did a definite resume "don't" managed to get through to the finalization process and turned out to be a pretty good candidate. And had I noticed the email address before deciding upon who to interview, I may have never known she was a good candidate because I probably would have tossed the application (unless there was something extraordinary or exceptional about it) if it seemed like the person just didn't bother to get a better email address (when other candidates had apparently put forth more effort).

In my own sort of conspiratorial interview thinking, I do think that sometimes "we don't think we want this person, but just in case we'll interview them just to confirm we don't want them" is the reason for interviewing some people. It could be down to two final candidates and one "just making sure we don't want her/him" candidate.

I mean it just depends on the overall quality of the application as well. For instance, if the person had long term experience working professionally and good references/referrals... then the email address is a strange quirk. If they have no experience and their resume is crap, then how did they get to the final interviewing picks?

[Wynch]

My answer was based on this:

which means I've already interviewed her, correct? I mean the time for me to throw out applicants based on their email address would be before interviews, but if I've already interviewed her then it's difficult to place more importance on her email address than on what I gathered during the interview. And if I didn't notice her email address before the interviewing process, I might think of it as one of those "amusing things in life" where someone who did a definite resume "don't" managed to get through to the finalization process and turned out to be a pretty good candidate. And had I noticed the email address before deciding upon who to interview I may have never known because I probably would have tossed the application (unless there was something extraordinary or exceptional about it) if it seemed like the person just didn't bother to get a better email address (when other candidates had apparently put forth more effort).

In my own sort of conspiratorial interview thinking, I do think that sometimes "we don't think we want this person, but just in case we'll interview them just to confirm we don't want them" is the reason for interviewing some people. It could be down to two final candidates and one "just making sure we don't want her/him" candidate.

I mean it just depends on the overall quality of the application as well. For instance, if the person had long term experience working professionally and good references/referrals... then the email address is a strange quirk. If they have no experience and their resume is crap, then how did they get to the final interviewing picks?

This is a fair response. I forgot that the question was about having already interviewed and narrowing it down.

That said, if they were equally qualified and otherwise incomparable, I would make the decision over the email, lol.

[marooned]

That said, if they were equally qualified and otherwise incomparable, I would make the decision over the email, lol.

At least from their pov there shouldn't be any doubt about why they weren't selected then. I mean, that's what baffles me is why would they have that as their email address when that is one of those things that will cause employers to throw you out as a possibility? That's what is really odd about it to me.

[Wynch]

At least from their pov there shouldn't be any doubt about why they weren't selected then. I mean, that's what baffles me is why would they have that as their email address when that is one of those things that will cause employers to throw you out as a possibility? That's what is really odd about it to me.

Like I said before, if I was looking at resumes, that would tell me that either that person is ignorant about professionalism regarding technology, or they just don't care enough to make a separate email. It's just silly.

[mu4]

People might not remember your name on a list of 100 people. Someone is going to remember sexybabe. Yea, you might be eliminated from 10 interviews out the gate for something like that, but it's the one that you capture the attention of someone that will land you the job.

Depending on the job and the interviewers, it will definitely cause a reaction.

Someone's name is definitely the neutral thing to do, since it's rather bland, normal, shows absolutely nothing, neutral. I don't think this girl wants a neutral reaction, she's trying to differentiate herself from the herd. Maybe on her resume she has a good list of qualifications, I mean if I had good qualifications I would definitely do something eye catching to make sure whoever read it would remember me.

If this girl is cute and sexy too, it's at least true. What I dislike the most is someone using sexy babe/etc and actually turn out to be a bit boring and plain.

When only boring, compliant professional machines are the only people that can be hired and paid, usually this is a time where there is a population will develop that is neither boring, compliant or professional and if they have access to resources or even just labor, they will develop their own sphere of influence. If they lack access to resources, they will attain it by any means neccessary.

[mu4]

Like I said before, if I was looking at resumes, that would tell me that either that person is ignorant about professionalism regarding technology, or they just don't care enough to make a separate email. It's just silly.

It's not silly at all, it's eye-catching. If all society and resources were used only in the most professional business fashion, it would be pure misery.

[FDG]

People might not remember your name on a list of 100 people. Someone is going to remember sexybabe. Yea, you might be eliminated from 10 interviews out the gate for something like that, but it's the one that you capture the attention of someone that will land you the job.

Depending on the job and the interviewers, it will definitely cause a reaction.

Someone's name is definitely the neutral thing to do, since it's rather bland, normal, shows absolutely nothing, neutral. I don't think this girl wants a neutral reaction, she's trying to differentiate herself from the herd. Maybe on her resume she has a good list of qualifications, I mean if I had good qualifications I would definitely do something eye catching to make sure whoever read it would remember me.

If this girl is cute and sexy too, it's at least true. What I dislike the most is someone using sexy babe/etc and actually turn out to be a bit boring and plain.

When only boring, compliant professional machines are the only people that can be hired and paid, usually this is a time where there is a population will develop that is neither boring, compliant or professional and if they have access to resources or even just labor, they will develop their own sphere of influence. If they lack access to resources, they will attain it by any means neccessary.

Process types can be long-winded. What you're trying to say is: I'll hire the hotter one.

But yeah, anyway. I'd say it's kind of idiotic to think that this can signal lack of professionality. I mean, Asia Carrera, with her star IQ, will probably be better at doing most jobs than the accounting student in a suit that is sitting near me, trying to do again and again a simple calculation. I'm pretty sure his resume will look professional. This kind of thinking is the recipe to build completely inefficient organizations filled with people that look the right way but can't do shit.

[Wynch]

It's not silly at all, it's eye-catching. If all society and resources were used only in the most professional business fashion, it would be pure misery.

You can be innovative and eye-catching without being inappropriate. "sexybaby" is not innovative. I would not read that email address and think "Hey, this person is edgy and creative, I like that!". That's a generic username and inappropriate for business.

It's like dressing for work. You don't have to dress inappropriately for the position in order to stand out and be creative.

[mu4]

You can be innovative and eye-catching without being inappropriate. "sexybaby" is not innovative. I would not read that email address and think "Hey, this person is edgy and creative, I like that!". That's a generic username and inappropriate for business.

It's like dressing for work. You don't have to dress inappropriately for the position in order to stand out and be creative.

What part of eye-catching means creative? But I guess sexybaby is a bit hard to justify, since many HR people in the US are a bit... shall we say.. female and opposite of sexy.

I'm pretty lucky I guess, I haven't really had to go thru the mundane events of life that many have gone thru in order to acquire a job and probably lack those skills. I hope to avoid this sort of situation at all cost since it's about as soul crushing as I imagine it to be.

Dressing for work is another of those things I wish to avoid, so is the whole resume thing.

[marooned]

This kind of thinking is the recipe to build completely inefficient organizations filled with people that look the right way but can't do shit.

Actually, I think I mostly agree with this.

I don't know, ideally I would be most interested in who someone is and what their qualifications and abilities actually are, and that's what I would try to be divining from looking through their applications. Of course, the more applications you have, the less time you have to thoroughly consider each if you want to fill the position any time soon (and they'll have applied for other things as well so if they don't hear back soon, they may be gone).

Edit: It's basically that I want to get through all the information to seeing who this person is and who they would be in the context of what I'm hiring them for. I don't care if they have a weird email address, or if they can't spell the name of the company, etc. unless those things are actually applicable to what they would be doing (for instance typos on the resume of a prospective editor would be a really bad sign). But yes, that's honestly what I believe in, who this person really is.

People might not remember your name on a list of 100 people. Someone is going to remember sexybabe.

I was thinking that as well... maybe it's a risky attempt to be remembered out of a pile of applications. But I didn't want to make a list of all the 'might be's as a lot of them would go away with additional information.

When only boring, compliant professional machines are the only people that can be hired and paid ...

I can see how amid all that "sexybaby" could look like a shining star in the otherwise bleak heavens.

[Creepy-]

What part of eye-catching means creative? But I guess sexybaby is a bit hard to justify, since many HR people in the US are a bit... shall we say.. female and opposite of sexy.

Hey now

I'm pretty lucky I guess, I haven't really had to go thru the mundane events of life that many have gone thru in order to acquire a job and probably lack those skills. I hope to avoid this sort of situation at all cost since it's about as soul crushing as I imagine it to be.

Soul-crushing? Really? I'm kind of enjoying it... I like going on interviews, in particular. I wonder if this is type-related. [Making a new thread]

Dressing for work is another of those things I wish to avoid, so is the whole resume thing.

Interesting; I like this part of work too.

[mu4]

Hey now

Haha, are you hired yet? I will need to put a * beside my comments. Actually I've dealt with some quite attractive HR folks, but they worked at fairly attractive companies. I think attractive people often hire other attractive people.

Soul-crushing? Really? I'm kind of enjoying it... I like going on interviews, in particular. I wonder if this is type-related. [Making a new thread]

I don't think I mind going to job interviews, I tend to get hired at them.
It's just I've only gone twice in my life. I view venturing into the unknown marketplace a bit dreadfully.

Interesting; I like this part of work too. [Making a new thread]

I've slowly adopted a sense of style that is dual purpose, work/live/play. I'm a pretty static person unlike numbers.

[mu4]

you don't know that.

"Yet"

It's just what I think, and a hypothesis.

But I definitely want to know if she's actually sexy or not!

[tereg]

I briefly skimmed through this thread, but what I'm gathering I feel is along an / dichotomy line between different schools of thought

On the one hand you have

“If you don't get noticed, you don't have anything. You just have to be noticed, but the art is in getting noticed naturally, without screaming or without tricks.” - Leo Burnett

“Without promotion something terrible happens... Nothing!” - P.T. Barnum

where the objective and the majority of the battle is to get yourself noticed, which can be (but not necessarily so) at odds with values like "tact" and "professionalism" (and I'm speaking of doing whatever it takes to get noticed, because I'm of the belief that you can stand out without superficial means) Basically doing whatever it takes with all of your energy to have one opportunity.

This school of thought basically goes like "You see? The very fact that you're talking about me means that I'm doing something right."

The other school of thought is one in which deeds and actions are what get you noticed. Not completely throwing aside the more superficial things that will get you noticed. I mean, you still have to give your resume, show up for an interview, demonstrate competence in the area, exude confidence. But the priority is different. It is not "make them notice you first then let the rest fall into place" it is "let them notice you by the merits and body of your work"

So, imo, this falls under an or divide.

[mu4]

So, imo, this falls under an or divide.

I think and also skew this quite a bit as well as other information interactions.

ESE are some of the more naturally noticeable people I've met, where as SEE can be very flamboyant and direct.

People in general want to be noticed for their Ego functions, even if that translate to them being noticed as "bland". There is a adaptive quality to being stealthy.

[tereg]

I think and also skew this quite a bit as well as other information interactions.

ESE are some of the more naturally noticeable people I've met, where as SEE can be very flamboyant and direct.

People in general want to be noticed for their Ego functions, even if that translate to them being noticed as "bland". There is a adaptive quality to being stealthy.

From the standpoint of visually being noticed, yes, it can certainly be skewed. But I'm more referring to the methodology of drawing attention to yourself which is not necessarily visually oriented.

[mu4]

From the standpoint of visually being noticed, yes, it can certainly be skewed. But I'm more referring to the methodology of drawing attention to yourself which is not necessarily visually oriented.

I wouldn't say there is a difference in information processing visually or otherwise.

Her goal is for others to notice her for being "sexy"... which is probably male targeted rather then something like notice me for being "professional", or notice me for being "nice", or notice me for being "energetic".

[tereg]

I think in the / case it can be said that their primary motivation is, on the side, to make things happen for yourself, be direct, be up front, which then causes others to notice them. It is the directness that causes the attention. The difference though in the case, imo, is that the primary motivation is not to get the other person to notice you, it is to make things happen for yourself by putting yourself out there and it is a rather subtle difference.

On the side, I also believe that the attention it garners is an after-effect. I think that the motivation would be to present themselves in a way that is comfortable to them. It is the interpretation of the comfort/quality of the appearance that gets the attention. The difference in this IM element case is that the primary motivation is to make yourself look good/feel good/feel comfortable and not necessarily to get the other person to notice you.

Even deeper than this can be a discussion of classifications of informational pieces that causes the other person to notice you

Some people notice originality.
Some people notice professionalism and "clean cut"
Some people notice consistency
Some people notice accolades, awards, and accomplishments
Some people notice "intangibles"
Some people notice a good attitude and not so srs
Some people notice a "never say die" attitude and a hard work ethic
Some people notice proper hygiene and appearance that fits the occasion

These are of course rather loose and just off the top of my head. But I think it's important to think of both sides of the attention equation to figure out and distinguish what it is that people do to try to get attention, and then what things actually grab the attention.

[mu4]

once again, you don't know that

Well I guess if I was to be more technically accurate about this conceptual SexyBabe1990(legal), I should say something more like this:

Her goal could be for others to notice her for being "sexy"... which is probably male targeted rather then something like notice me for being "professional", or notice me for being "nice", or notice me for being "energetic".

But since conceptually SexyBabe1990 alias might not even be SexyBabe1990 but LovelyAngel1987, the facts of the situation could be different.

I do know between SexyBabe1990, [InsertName] and LovelyAngel1987, equally qualified, I would hire the hotter one.

[mu4]

If you want to be hired, you need to stand out. So far, I agree. However, you have to stand out in a way that is RELEVANT.

Depends on what's between the legs, honey.