Originally posted by Ax3l
It's not corporate it's for a box office position
if you're not applying for the kind of job where you have to visit/call/stalk people and sell stuff, i don't advise calling unless they said you should. usually a good idea at the end of the interview to ask something like "what are the next steps in the interview process?" and they'll usually just tell you something like "we'll contact you when we've reached a decision", some might be like "we'll only get back to you if we give you the position", and mom/pop places might be like "call/email us in 2 weeks". y'all b1tches should know this shit
Originally posted by Bashar TegIf you're fine with that part, what else is there? It just seems like a bad comparison in general to the actual riots the video used as examples. The "burn it down" remark was made by a grieving stepfather, and he's since been quoted as regretting saying it at all, but my point was more just that there was a specific issue at play in those riots, they were a reaction to something political, whilst this Philly thing is the kind of shit that happens when sports fans get drunk as shit and roam the streets in great numbers.
it's nice to see a new article which properly labels their actions, however the fans were not generalized as rioters, and the distinction was drawn between typical fans and "vandals" as fox news called them. i'm fine with that.as far as "burn it down", really a weak point to make since it was uttered by a mourning brother who felt that a member of his family was murdered with impunity. so to generalize that as marching orders to an entire movememt is just ludicrous and only plays into surt's intellectual dishonesty campaign.
There have been fewer arrests, sure, but there were also a LOT more people, and the police said that it was hard to make arrests because most of the people around were just normal people having a good time. Plus, they're following up on the specific violent incidents and aim to arrest all of the people who committed crimes anyway. But in the video, that gets turned into evidence of widespread white supremacy, because literally anything is evidence for widespread white supremacy in this political climate.
But they just aren't comparable at the end of the day, so the video's point is pretty dull, far from the incisive political bombshell it portrays itself as, musical bombast and all (which reminded me of those awful alt-right YouTube videos that stir up racists by having the theme from Requiem for a Dream play over select images and statistics chosen to enrage).
Above all, the incidents just weren't the same magnitude, either:
"Videos quickly spread Sunday night on Twitter, showing people looting a gas station and bringing down an awning at the Ritz-Carlton hotel. Windows were also smashed at the Macy’s on Market Street, and a number of traffic signals in Center City were brought to the ground." (Philly article)
Compared to (using the same example as before):
"A row of businesses on West Florissant Avenue, a major thoroughfare in the St. Louis suburb, was engulfed in flames Monday night. Police cars and vehicles at a nearby dealership were turned into fireballs. There were so many blazes that firefighters couldn't reach every one." (CNN article)
Originally posted by Bashar TegNo worries, I appreciate you acknowledging that point (which is something Surtur is loath to do on the best of days)
[...]i do get what you mean about political motivation being required for a 'terrorism' label, and you're correct. didn't mean to brush that off but the rest of your post was just idk
Originally posted by Scribble
If you're fine with that part, what else is there? It just seems like a bad comparison in general to the actual riots the video used as examples. The "burn it down" remark was made by a grieving stepfather, and he's since been quoted as regretting saying it at all, but my point was more just that there was a specific issue at play in those riots, they were a reaction to something political, whilst this Philly thing is the kind of shit that happens when sports fans get drunk as shit and roam the streets in great numbers.There have been fewer arrests, sure, but there were also a LOT more people, and the police said that it was hard to make arrests because most of the people around were just normal people having a good time. Plus, they're following up on the specific violent incidents and aim to arrest all of the people who committed crimes anyway. But in the video, that gets turned into evidence of widespread white supremacy, because literally anything is evidence for widespread white supremacy in this political climate.
But they just aren't comparable at the end of the day, so the video's point is pretty dull, far from the incisive political bombshell it portrays itself as, musical bombast and all (which reminded me of those awful alt-right YouTube videos that stir up racists by having the theme from Requiem for a Dream play over select images and statistics chosen to enrage).
Above all, the incidents just weren't the same magnitude, either:
"Videos quickly spread Sunday night on Twitter, showing people looting a gas station and bringing down an awning at the Ritz-Carlton hotel. Windows were also smashed at the Macy’s on Market Street, and a number of traffic signals in Center City were brought to the ground." (Philly article)
Compared to (using the same example as before):
"A row of businesses on West Florissant Avenue, a major thoroughfare in the St. Louis suburb, was engulfed in flames Monday night. Police cars and vehicles at a nearby dealership were turned into fireballs. There were so many blazes that firefighters couldn't reach every one." (CNN article)
right but your point on "burn it all down" implied that there would have been no riots if he had remained silent, which would again be ludicrous. black people were very angry over a situation which they took personally, not a political motive or marching orders from anyone.
right, hence the 'thank you' note, which is becoming the universal 'follow up' according to what i'm reading. but their particular interview process is another matter and there is no standard. so if these sites/articles are telling you to not inquire at the interview and set your own rule for extra-curricular following up, i call balderdash. then again this place might be chill and not care either way. do what you feel is right, but generally speaking i have given sound advice.
Originally posted by Ax3l
well i called and they took down my name and position so they could call me back right when the hiring process begins so i'm glad i called and was just like "have y'all started hiring yet?"
*hangs up phone* "find this jackass' resume and burn it"
j/k hope you get hired by the boxes office.