Moderation note: The original version of this comment contained the names of people the author believed to have worked for the orgs in question. However, the moderators were alerted that multiple people on the list hadn’t actually been employed by the organizations they were cited as having worked for. The person who contacted us was concerned that the individuals might be seen by future employers as having hidden some part of their work history because their names might be found on this post after an online search.
After reaching out to the author and not hearing back, the moderators chose to address the concern by editing the comment to replace the names with the numbers of people the author believed had worked for each combination of orgs. We think this lets the author make their point without misrepresenting any individual’s employment history. We may revert some changes or make further changes if the author responds to us later.
If you have any questions or concerns about Forum moderation policy, please reach out to let me know.
Just saw this. The complaint was apparently that people were listed as having worked for orgs (other than LR) where they only contracted or consulted. But as I recall it, I transcribed these associations directly from Linkedin. So I’ve reverted the comment, and changed “worked at” to “had experience at” to more precisely match the language of LinkedIn.
Moderation note: The original version of this comment contained the names of people the author believed to have worked for the orgs in question. However, the moderators were alerted that multiple people on the list hadn’t actually been employed by the organizations they were cited as having worked for. The person who contacted us was concerned that the individuals might be seen by future employers as having hidden some part of their work history because their names might be found on this post after an online search.
After reaching out to the author and not hearing back, the moderators chose to address the concern by editing the comment to replace the names with the numbers of people the author believed had worked for each combination of orgs. We think this lets the author make their point without misrepresenting any individual’s employment history. We may revert some changes or make further changes if the author responds to us later.
If you have any questions or concerns about Forum moderation policy, please reach out to let me know.
Just saw this. The complaint was apparently that people were listed as having worked for orgs (other than LR) where they only contracted or consulted. But as I recall it, I transcribed these associations directly from Linkedin. So I’ve reverted the comment, and changed “worked at” to “had experience at” to more precisely match the language of LinkedIn.