Rykk wrote:
> necoandjeff wrote:
>> Rykk wrote:
>>> Mr. Smith wrote:
>>>> "Michael Cash" <mikecash@buggerallspammers.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:k980t0hhmfdi4fpu78lqkg3bn17vp34dop@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:44:04 +1000, windsor <fake@none.com>
>>>>> brought 
>>>> 
>>>>>> Depth of rapport with the interviewer is also important.
>>>>> 
>>>>> That's a very pleasant way of rephrasing "sucking up".
>>>> 
>>>> that's silly, "sucking up" is usually a poor way to impress someone
>>>> at an interview. It usually means you don't have anything
>>>> interesting to say and you are easily intimidated.
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately that would be me.  Not that I am so much intimidated
>>> the person as by the act of attempting to establish rapport.  It
>>> isn't that I have nothing to say either, but that I am completely
>>> uninterested in all non-functional conversation.  So as long as the
>>> conversation is pertinant I do fine.  But if it turns to something
>>> trivial such as the weather, or personal, "I had a baby yesterday,"
>>> then I am filled wave of disinterest.  I have absolutely no idea how
>>> to respond to these completely irrelevant remarks.  Interviews seem
>>> to involve one non-sequitor after another.
>> 
>> Wow. Aren't you supposed to preface a confession like that with
>> something like. "Hi, my name is Rykk and I'm a suffering
>> self-a-holic"...
> 
> Heh,  are you trying to imply that I'm concieted?

No implication required. You said it quite clearly yourself I thought.