So why are you defending Nuance then? - when you do not even work there? Posted: Mar 27th, 2016 - 10:32 pm In Reply to: I have done your job in spades - QA person
I really find it hard to believe those conditions existed in an on site job, especially years ago, when our skills were actually in demand and well paid. Or was that why? It was so well paid they held you to those standards? Well, at least you probably would have gotten unemployment immediately then I presume, and not have to go through the long, drawn out procedure Nuance puts you through to get it.
I find it hard to understand why you would take it upon yourself to defend not only QA in general but Nuance when you don't even work here.
There is really no defense, and if you truly have done this on both sides as you say you would know that.
Post A Reply Reply By Email Options
Complete Discussion Below: (  marks the location of current message within thread)
- My Nuance experience . . .. - MT Lifer (Views: 1576, 2016-03-25, 1:43 pm)
- Word omission - QA person (Views: 1090, 2016-03-26, 9:27 am)
- To QA....You should proofread your OWN work. - Read your message. (Views: 1137, 2016-03-26, 9:39 am)
- QA error - nn (Views: 885, 2016-03-26, 10:44 am)
- Spelling police - QA person (Views: 896, 2016-03-26, 12:52 pm)
- QA person - Charming (Views: 882, 2016-03-26, 1:54 pm)
- QA person - Anon (Views: 766, 2016-03-27, 11:45 am)
|
