"Rykk" <NospamIshnar@nospamhotmail.nospamcom> wrote in message
news:5HZAd.49204$uM5.29093@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> necoandjeff wrote:
> > 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 pertinent 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 conceited?
> >
> > No implication required. You said it quite clearly yourself I thought.
>
> Then you are just misunderstanding me and making assumptions.
>
> I fail to see how being disinterested in non-functional conversation
equates
> to conceit.
>
> Rykk
>

Just live with the fact that it does and move on.