This is a silly article. The quality of OO has really gone downhill the past year or so.

Comparing networking with drug taking in sport is so silly you have to wonder whether it's been written as tongue-in-cheek; a challenge maybe. You can imagine the author's mates coming up with two completely unrelated topics and challenging him to link them in an article.

Anyway, networking is important. If I'm looking for someone for a position and if I know the applicant then that's worth a lot. I know their strengths and their weaknesses. If I don't know them; if they are respondents to a job ad for example, it is much harder to judge them. Similarly, a personal recommendation from someone who I trust is worth a lot as well. I think of some people in my network and if they say someone is good then I can be reasonably confident they are. Similarly (and it's happened at least once) if they say someone is not good, then they can save me from a possibly disastrous mistake.

Silly, silly article.

"Comparing networking with drug taking in sport is so silly you have to wonder whether it's been written as tongue-in-cheek; a challenge maybe."

Pineapple, your invidious comments above give cause for concern over your abilities to correctly comprehend the contents of this article.

Mirko has simply cited the Marion Jones case as an example of how cheating has permeated most sections of society and how parts of society, devoid of any sincerity, purposely engage in networking, strictly for personal gain.

"This is a silly article. The quality of OO has really gone downhill the past year or so."

Really, Pineapple? I note your very first post on OO was as recent as 25/8/07. Therefore, you've only been registered on this forum for some 6 weeks.

Your initial comments on OO, during the 25 August, were addressed to the author of the article, Alexander Deane:

"Gosh Alex. Will you please piss-off back home to England. There's nothing for you here."

Welcome to OLO Pineapple and thank you for your "worthy" contributions.