skunk said:Surely there wasn't a sheep involved, was there?![]()
hehehe...that's funny
skunk said:Surely there wasn't a sheep involved, was there?![]()
iGav said:Shakes hand warmly and welcomes beatsme into The Club![]()
![]()
iGav said:Lucky that... otherwise you might have gained yourself a bit of reputation in that office.![]()
atszyman said:It all depends on the size of the "office" and how segmented it is.
Im confused. Isn't getting into the sack the whole point.welshandrew said:The only rule is never have a 'relationship' with someone that you can sack, or that can sack you.
Transatlantic translation problem.emw said:Im confused. Isn't getting into the sack the whole point.![]()
On the flip side, you could become the angry and vengeful person. Which in my opinion, is more fun than being the target of said person.jsw said:Now imagine that you need to continue to work with this angry and perhaps vengeful person.
I rest his case.emw said:On the flip side, you could become the angry and vengeful person. Which in my opinion, is more fun than being the target of said person.![]()
Good point. The key is to have your fun, then get "offended" first.emw said:On the flip side, you could become the angry and vengeful person. Which in my opinion, is more fun than being the target of said person.![]()
Hmmm. What's this new fashion for pre-emptive strikes?jsw said:Good point. The key is to have your fun, then get "offended" first.
Well played, sir.
skunk said:Hmmm. What's this new fashion for pre-emptive strikes?
Er... hypothetically, of course, right?2nyRiggz said:Its not fun having someone wanting to run you over at work...not fun at all...her friends will hate you as well and totally ruin your chances with the cute accounting chick that looks like she is interested.![]()
justinbaby said:I used to work for company headquarters with 3,000 people and about 18 different buildings. The company actually ENCOURAGED dating and married couples as long as they didn't report to the same VP. If they did, one of them would be transferred, with the company's blessing to another department! The idea was the couple, as opposed to the individual, would have more company loyalty and it would make it more difficult for one person to leave. I'm serious.
beatsme said:I don't mean this in an argumentative or belittling/insulting way, but just out of curiosity...
those of you who say it's a bad deal:
have you ever had the opportunity presented to you?