Very well then, carry on with the job postings.
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Meyer
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 1:34 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] separate list for jobs
There is another benefit in addition to, "skills should I cultivate." There is a follow-the-money factor. Declaring I'm for Linked Data is one thing.
Putting Linked Data in a job title is something far more significant.
Since code4lib is not always boast4lib-ish, it would be too great a loss to not see the evidence of financial investment by institutions for things like the Hydra stack (Solr, Fedora, Blacklight...) over the last few years.
When your HR department says you are building an RDF-based triple store, I am pretty certain you will be doing it.
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Richard Sarvas <
> [log in to unmask]
> > wrote:
> > Not to be a jerk about this, but why is the answer always "No"?
> > There
> > to be more posts on this list relating to job openings than there
> > are relating to code discussions. Are job postings a part why this
> > list was originally created? If so, I'll stop now.
> Fragmentation dilutes the community and creates an unnecessary barrier
> by requiring people to know one more thing. Email filters take no time
> at all to set up so anyone who considers them noise doesn't need to be
> exposed to them.