<p>novi, I always thought you are a pretty smart guy. Are you seriously trying to equate stating my vey honest opinion of the school, which is not wrong anyway you cut it (and I believe is more helpful than opinions through maize and blue glasses), to falsifying information on a resume?</p>
<p>Also, those stats ARE pedestrian. I was trying to explain why I was going to suggest a ding anyway (without taking the “minor” thing into account)</p>
<p>You have to realize what happened. I saw the resume, and wasn’t going to make a big deal out of it. I took time out of my day to call up this dude to tell him to take it off his resume for his own good. He refused. I insisted that if he doesn’t I’ll report him. He still refused. I posted here for opinions on what I should do. This dude took the time to post here, not only did he fail to acknowledge he did anything wrong, he decided to provoke me by throwing insults and threats. </p>
<p>Low road? Really? Don’t blame Madoff for doing anything wrong, blame the whistleblowers for taking the low road!! Are you crazy?</p>
<p>And about being nice… I might not be a nice guy, but it’s pretty business 101. If someone holds information that can screw my career over and is on the fence about what to do with it, I would at least pretend to be nice to him, rather than confrontational.</p>
<p>bearcats. Read some of your posts. Calling someone with a 3.7 gpa in LSA as being “pedestrian” is insulting, no matter how you slice it. I agree it was correct of you to try to warn this guy to change his resume, but I have a feeling that you said more than just that. Furthermore, what was gained by announcing to everyone on CC that you sent his message to the university? It just wasn’t “nice.”</p>
<p>Well, at least this should be a lesson for to those who think they can “tweak” their resumes to make them look better. In this day and age, someone is going to call you out. While I don’t care for the way things ended up, bearcats did do the right thing initially.</p>
<p>It is not, especially when you put it in the context of the number of 3.7s from non hard science/engineering majors with no solid experience who routinely get rejected from getting interviews. 3.7s in a soft major like econ is by no means impressive, add in 20 credits from Ross classes that curve to B+/A- and the gpa is an absolute joke. While Cum Laude (top 25%) is set at 3.2 for engineering, the equivalent honors for LSA is set at a gpa of 3.649. In other words, this guy barely cuts top 25% in LSA. That’s very pedestrian for high finance. </p>
<p>from an old post</p>
<p>"LSA awards students who are ranked in the top 25%, 10%, and 3% of their class with distinction on their transcripts and diplomas. The top 25% will be awarded “distinction,” the top 10% with “high distinction,” and the top 3% with “highest distinction.” The GPA range for distinction is determined on the cumulative GPAs of the LSA May graduating class and is subject to change every year based on the GPAs of the May class. If you graduate in December or August, the GPA range for distinction will be based off the preceding May graduating class. Distinction is usually determined by the second week of June.</p>
<p>May, August and December 2007 graduates:
Higest Distinction: 3.930 - 4.000
High Distinction: 3.821 - 3.929
Distinction: 3.649 - 3.820"</p>
<p>Novi he’s right. Bearcats’ statement implied that his overall qualifications were pedestrian for high finance, which they are, particularly for a bulge bracket. 3.7 and 1400 is certainly good, but it’s merely check-the-box good for such firms. Most everyone bulge brackets interview will typically have at least those stats. What makes the overall resume pedestrian is the fact that nothing really stands out as “we should interview this kid.” It appears his top experience is at a not-well-known boutique in Michigan (not exactly a financial center).</p>
<p>Disclaimer: I don’t agree with the way he went about this. But this particular judgment is accurate.</p>
<p>I believe those honors cutoffs have declined slightly since '07. Negligibly, but fyi.</p>
<p>Edit: The ranges for May 2009 were:
Highest Distinction: 3.927 – 4.000
High Distinction: 3.809 – 3.926
Distinction: 3.644 – 3.808</p>
<p>So a guy lies on his resume, gets caught and is given a warning to remove it with no consequences (??? lucky), decides not to, and gets reported? I don’t see a problem here… on the other hand, it’s quite surprising that some other people seem to think otherwise.</p>
<p>To YouLoser, if it wouldn’t make or break your resume, then why would you risk lying to put it on there? Clearly you did think it was that important. It could (I don’t know) be enough to get you the interview over someone slightly more qualified. What if that person were me?</p>
<p>I usually don’t agree with bearcats posts/opinions/actions.</p>
<p>I just want to share my experience. I have worked in the corporate world and have been a hiring manager for many years. It is common to run a background check before making a job offer to new hires. If there are any discrepancies, no offer is made. It is common to ask for references from networks.</p>
<p>A minor is a degree which can be easily verified by a background check.</p>
<p>The following is good advice.
</p>
<p>Be honest about your resume. Be careful about what you say or do on the web.</p>