Regardless of his response to you, it is your response within this thread that comes off as 'unprofessional' and childish. Let's say, for half a second, that he offers you a job. Now you're working for that 'loser' that has that same opinion of title-(arch vs. non). Does your opinion of him change now that he offered you a job?
Again I say, your view on the matter will change once you have a license.
Any response from a firm that is inundated with resumes is better than no response. The fact that they took the time to give some professional advice shows that they at least read your cover letter/resume. What if he had offered a critique of your portfolio and made some suggestions as to how to make it better? Would that offend you too?
(And by the way, graduating from a top university don't mean shit if your attitude sucks).
Why don't we move on ... this thread isn't about Ms. Architect. She's made her views known and those who don't care for those views have made theirs known as well.
1. I would turn him down. Also... I have had to work for a loser or two in the past - simply because of economics and have learnt that making coffee is sometimes way better.
2. I am actually - this close to getting done with my exams. And will be of the same opinion still, out of respect for the thousands out there who chose not to get registered, but are extremely talented individuals. ( If that is a reflection of how you had a turn of faith, I hate to say.... your opinion should really not flicker as your destiny jumps from the "haves and have-nots " )
3. My resume is actually... so steller, that it gets a response in 50% of the cases. Until today, people had only encouraging and useful things to say, whether about my presentation, attitude or portfolio - and I have tremendous respect for those people. So, to answer your question, no it does not offend me when someone criticizes my work. My excellent schooling has taught me to appreciate honest criticism.
4. Your letter does not offend me in the least. Actually neither did his.
I agree. Beating a dead horse doesn't get us anywhere.
However, to me, that sort of behavior is the crux of the issue. 'Rudeness' is a two way street. Oftentimes, it is more about the fact that you were rejected than how it was done. My point above was, does your opinion of a particular firm change if you received a job offer? Its funny how we justify are own beliefs by belittling the very thing we were striving for. In other words, does working for that same dickhead make everything okay because you're getting a paycheck?
not necessarily, gibbost. i'm licensed, and all this didn't magically start to make sense to me once i was 'in the club'...
and even in a down job market, looking at your portfolio and taking the time to respond isn't very much... it's sad that we are now so grateful to be thrown some crumbs.
I know the architect-as-officially-regulated-title issue has been beat and beat and beat, but honestly: I pay over two grand a year in E&O insurance because AS a licensed professional in a regulated profession I'm personally liable for all my buildings until the day I die. Everyone who thinks a "title" doesn't matter should try on that responsibility for size and see if they still don't care what unregulated people - people who do not have that liability - call themselves.
"I'm personally liable for all my buildings until the day I die"
With all due respect, what's the scope of your liability Donna? It's not structural safety. Fire code safety and building code compliance? Sure, but many could potentially be in charge of that. Waterproofing?
I compile project manual documents that absolve you of so much responsibility (material performance, product warranties, testing agencies) that I'm not exactly sure what your liability actually is. An incompetent architect could potentially create an unsafe environment, but there are so many checks and balances in play, I'm not even sure that's possible any more.
ok, but a PE carries liability too, doesn't he? and an unlicensed engineer doesn't. this has nothing to do with the title issue...you'd just have a DIFFERENT title that confers this level of responsibility.
Difference with engineers is that only handful of them (Civil, Structural) need any licensure. Those who do (need licenses) actually carry a heavy liability on life safety.
Maybe that's why architects get so bent out of shape over licensure. It's relatively meaningless without the arbitrary requirement thrown in there. So better hold on to it tight, it's all you really got to protect you from competition.
no, i appreciate the license and what comes with it (if not the current licensing procedure). it's the inability to use the word 'architect' without the idiotic accompanying 'intern' that i take issue with. if you have a degree in architecture you should be able to call yourself an architect..
but i agree, it's been beaten to death. moving on..........
Rudeness - Share your rejection stories.
Ms. Architect,
Regardless of his response to you, it is your response within this thread that comes off as 'unprofessional' and childish. Let's say, for half a second, that he offers you a job. Now you're working for that 'loser' that has that same opinion of title-(arch vs. non). Does your opinion of him change now that he offered you a job?
Again I say, your view on the matter will change once you have a license.
Any response from a firm that is inundated with resumes is better than no response. The fact that they took the time to give some professional advice shows that they at least read your cover letter/resume. What if he had offered a critique of your portfolio and made some suggestions as to how to make it better? Would that offend you too?
(And by the way, graduating from a top university don't mean shit if your attitude sucks).
Why don't we move on ... this thread isn't about Ms. Architect. She's made her views known and those who don't care for those views have made theirs known as well.
hahahaaa.... ok I'll humor you:
1. I would turn him down. Also... I have had to work for a loser or two in the past - simply because of economics and have learnt that making coffee is sometimes way better.
2. I am actually - this close to getting done with my exams. And will be of the same opinion still, out of respect for the thousands out there who chose not to get registered, but are extremely talented individuals. ( If that is a reflection of how you had a turn of faith, I hate to say.... your opinion should really not flicker as your destiny jumps from the "haves and have-nots " )
3. My resume is actually... so steller, that it gets a response in 50% of the cases. Until today, people had only encouraging and useful things to say, whether about my presentation, attitude or portfolio - and I have tremendous respect for those people. So, to answer your question, no it does not offend me when someone criticizes my work. My excellent schooling has taught me to appreciate honest criticism.
4. Your letter does not offend me in the least. Actually neither did his.
And really... file makes an excellent point. Lets save our angst for those who really deserve it.
File,
I agree. Beating a dead horse doesn't get us anywhere.
However, to me, that sort of behavior is the crux of the issue. 'Rudeness' is a two way street. Oftentimes, it is more about the fact that you were rejected than how it was done. My point above was, does your opinion of a particular firm change if you received a job offer? Its funny how we justify are own beliefs by belittling the very thing we were striving for. In other words, does working for that same dickhead make everything okay because you're getting a paycheck?
not necessarily, gibbost. i'm licensed, and all this didn't magically start to make sense to me once i was 'in the club'...
and even in a down job market, looking at your portfolio and taking the time to respond isn't very much... it's sad that we are now so grateful to be thrown some crumbs.
It was inevitable for a 'rudeness' thread to eventually become self referential.
"Hey, F you buddy! I'm just trying to help your stupid face. And you over there, what you lookin' at? Dick!"
Fun!
Sorry, off topic, but:
I know the architect-as-officially-regulated-title issue has been beat and beat and beat, but honestly: I pay over two grand a year in E&O insurance because AS a licensed professional in a regulated profession I'm personally liable for all my buildings until the day I die. Everyone who thinks a "title" doesn't matter should try on that responsibility for size and see if they still don't care what unregulated people - people who do not have that liability - call themselves.
And as I've also said many times: no the title has nothing to do with talent.
Jesus!
"I'm personally liable for all my buildings until the day I die"
With all due respect, what's the scope of your liability Donna? It's not structural safety. Fire code safety and building code compliance? Sure, but many could potentially be in charge of that. Waterproofing?
I compile project manual documents that absolve you of so much responsibility (material performance, product warranties, testing agencies) that I'm not exactly sure what your liability actually is. An incompetent architect could potentially create an unsafe environment, but there are so many checks and balances in play, I'm not even sure that's possible any more.
ok, but a PE carries liability too, doesn't he? and an unlicensed engineer doesn't. this has nothing to do with the title issue...you'd just have a DIFFERENT title that confers this level of responsibility.
Difference with engineers is that only handful of them (Civil, Structural) need any licensure. Those who do (need licenses) actually carry a heavy liability on life safety.
Maybe that's why architects get so bent out of shape over licensure. It's relatively meaningless without the arbitrary requirement thrown in there. So better hold on to it tight, it's all you really got to protect you from competition.
no, i appreciate the license and what comes with it (if not the current licensing procedure). it's the inability to use the word 'architect' without the idiotic accompanying 'intern' that i take issue with. if you have a degree in architecture you should be able to call yourself an architect..
but i agree, it's been beaten to death. moving on..........
This thread has gone COMPLETELY off the rails.
timothysalder@????seems like you tried to post something and it didn't work?? or edited by moderator??
No, I hit the post comment, then ran out of time to edit, so all I left was a .
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.