A number of you may have noted that your posts requesting information on a specific job offer have not appeared on the IR Rumor Mill. The IR Rumor Mill team has had extensive discussions concerning what our policy should be on reporting job offers.
Our current policy is not to disclose offers unless that information comes directly from the candidate in question. Job offers involve sensitive information exchanged between schools and prospective employees. A candidate often negotiates with a school over the terms of the contract. Other schools may have reasons to adjust their searches in light of a job offer. These and other reasons strike us as sufficient warrants for treading carefully in this area.
Once a candidate accepts an offer and we can confirm his or her "off the market" status, we will post that information.
We have to admit to the existence of some internal disagreement over this policy. Therefore, we thought it would be useful to throw the question open to the community for input. Please let us know what you think, and why.
Friday, October 27, 2006
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Monday, October 16, 2006
Comment Moderation Enabled
We've decided to turn on comment moderation for the immediate future. As interesting as it is to discover that, among other things, some people over the age of 12 find King Missile's post-1990 ouevre funny enough to quote from (extensively) on this blog, we think it might be easier to screen as many posts as possible rather than to delete them after they appear.
IR Job List Fall 2007 Posted
A preliminary listing of International Relations jobs through October 13, 2007 has been posted. It has been backdated to October 1 so that you don't have to scroll through it on the main page.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Unconfirmed Rumors: IR Jobs (New)
Since the job market is starting to take form we think it is time for a new rumors thread. And for an editor's note.
We've had to delete a large number of posts lately. We understand that it can be difficult to resist gossiping about candidates, particularly senior-level candidates, and departments, but we don't consider that appropriate activity for the IR Rumor Mill. We apologize to those who made reasoned arguments about the inappropriateness of the questions and discussions, but we deleted your posts to make it less likely for the conversation to continue. We may put up some of these comments in the IR Rumor Mill Discussion thread [note: as we have been doing as long as those comments are informational rather than speculative or dispariging].
We'll be a bit more tolerant of some of this kind of posting in the Job-market discussion thread, but even there we want to make sure the conversation "stays clean."
If you can't resist, there are plenty of outlets for this sort of nonsense (which, we believe, reflects very badly on our field): IR Discussions, American and Comparative Jobs 2, and so forth.
Feel free to discuss this policy in the IR Rumor Mill Discussion thread. But we won't change our minds.
We are, of course, interested in confirmation of the accuracy of the information we've posted in the tally sheet. The information we have is, at the least, incomplete.
We have reason to believe that some departments have responded to the various rumor mills by trying to better police information about their candidates and searches. We understand the rationale for such policies, but want to reiterate our stance: transparency -- within limits -- is in the best interests of the community. Interview information is already shared between faculty members and fellows at many institutions, and so the only people left in the dark are candidates (and prospective candidates) who lack access to these "information networks."
We've had to delete a large number of posts lately. We understand that it can be difficult to resist gossiping about candidates, particularly senior-level candidates, and departments, but we don't consider that appropriate activity for the IR Rumor Mill. We apologize to those who made reasoned arguments about the inappropriateness of the questions and discussions, but we deleted your posts to make it less likely for the conversation to continue. We may put up some of these comments in the IR Rumor Mill Discussion thread [note: as we have been doing as long as those comments are informational rather than speculative or dispariging].
We'll be a bit more tolerant of some of this kind of posting in the Job-market discussion thread, but even there we want to make sure the conversation "stays clean."
If you can't resist, there are plenty of outlets for this sort of nonsense (which, we believe, reflects very badly on our field): IR Discussions, American and Comparative Jobs 2, and so forth.
Feel free to discuss this policy in the IR Rumor Mill Discussion thread. But we won't change our minds.
We are, of course, interested in confirmation of the accuracy of the information we've posted in the tally sheet. The information we have is, at the least, incomplete.
We have reason to believe that some departments have responded to the various rumor mills by trying to better police information about their candidates and searches. We understand the rationale for such policies, but want to reiterate our stance: transparency -- within limits -- is in the best interests of the community. Interview information is already shared between faculty members and fellows at many institutions, and so the only people left in the dark are candidates (and prospective candidates) who lack access to these "information networks."
Monday, October 09, 2006
IR Rumor Mill Discussion
As part of a broader housecleaning effort, we're moving posts related to the IR Rumor Mill itself here. So post away.
Note: we've moved the discussion of the issues involved in revealing/not revealing oneself as an interviewee from the "rumors" discussion to the comments section of this post.
Note: we've moved the discussion of the issues involved in revealing/not revealing oneself as an interviewee from the "rumors" discussion to the comments section of this post.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
Job-market discussion
Feeling anxious? Need to decompress? Want advice from peers and people who've already been through the process? Want to give some sage advice of your own? This is the place.
New Regime
IR Rumor Mill is now under new management. While we're getting our house in order, a few important notices:
• Job listings will be available soon. We recognize that most job applications are either due on October 1st or October 15th and that, in consequence, the list will be of little help for those making decisions about their applications. We hope, instead, that the listings will serve as a reference point for job-market developments.
• After a brief experiment with comment moderation, we have decided to disable it on a temporary basis. Please be on your best behavior; we will delete comments that bring disrepute on the IR Rumor Mill. If the comment sections begin to look like those found on some of the other "rumor" and "discussion sites" (some of you know what we're talking about) we'll return to being a moderated forum. The short version: we do not view discussions of the quality of specific job applicants as appropriate subjects for the IR Rumor Mill.
• We suspect that some short lists are already decided and that interviewees have already been contacted. We will soon be establishing discussion threads for job-market related information. A few rumors are currently circulating at American and Comparative Jobs. We have no corroborating evidence for these rumors, however.
IR Job List Fall 2007
Please note that the dates in the second column are the expiration dates for the APSAnet posting, not the due dates; click on individual entries for due dates; APSAnet membership required.
Table includes all positions with "International Relations" listed in the Fields of Specialization through Listing ID 11047 (October 13, 5 PM EST)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)