It's not the cable, so much as...where's all the special treatment people think I get that makes me such a sweet, simple, soul(of course I totally fail at that too.)

They're looking for an editor, not a subject matter expert.

No, they do actually want people with PhDs (or PharmDs, whatever). I think my resume made it through their first round because of how much experience I have. But I think I fall short on the knowledge side.

I'm not bagging on myself and my abilities; I know what I can do, and do well. But I don't actually have a PharmD.

I'm going to do the editing test to the best of my abilities and see how it shakes out.

No, they do actually want people with PhDs (or PharmDs, whatever)

Yeah, but having met a lot of PhDs...how many of them are actually good editors? I'm guessing vanishingly few.

I applied for a job at a library on the basis of my ten years in catalog upgrading, and I got a very nice personalized letter back saying they wished they could hire me but they were locked into getting someone with a masters of library science. Apparently there had been comments of "She would understand the computers! And know what we were talking about!"

I think there's a niche out there for interpreters between the computer people and the non-techies. I remember a nerd quiz like that.

I do appreciate the support, guys! I'm really NOT saying "I am the worst editor ever; no, I have no right to even call myself an editor because my communication skills are one step above an amoeba! Why, WHY am I even trying to get work in the field I've been in for 18 years? I am worthless!!!"

I'm just saying, "Wow, I didn't expect this level of clinical depth. This is the kind of manuscript I would give to my boss if I got one," because I *did.* Some articles were above my knowledge base, and I passed them on to my boss because she could edit them.

I'm probably not articulating well. The position isn't just a punctuation-and-grammar editing position; it's content-based as well, which is why they want PhDs.

The fact that I'm taken aback by the level of the content isn't a disparagement on my skills. They want more than a comma wrangler. And that's okay.

I find it very humbling to stumble on things that I think I should know but which might as well be a mystic art for all the sense it makes to me. I look at higher math, with all the squiggles and letters, and I feel like I'm back in grade school being told "diagram that sentence!"

I think there's a niche out there for interpreters between the computer people and the non-techies

That's pretty much my entire job, so I hope there continues to be one for twenty or so years (wow, that's depressing).

The position isn't just a punctuation-and-grammar editing position; it's content-based as well, which is why they want PhDs.

How big a niche is that? And obviously you are better at editing pharma content than, say, Amy, who's perfectly good at editing English--hmm, I don't even know what scale to use for the question, but how do you rate yourself in terms of how much you do get and how much pharmaceutical stuff specifically you can edit?

The position isn't just a punctuation-and-grammar editing position; it's content-based as well, which is why they want PhDs.

Yeah, that's not you.

But the skills you do have rock and will be put to use well somewhere. Just not in this place.

So Amazon will let you upload images for personalized gift carding.

And Jillian was fantastic on Huff Po.

It's nearly noon, I should have more than that to say. But everything else is "we want information on our secure site that we said you wouldn't have access to after you filled out earlier forms."

Yeah, but having met a lot of PhDs...how many of them are actually good editors? I'm guessing vanishingly few.

Working around PhDs all the time, (and being one myself), I can attest to this.

Tep, I understand where you are coming from. I think the proposed company is cutting off their noses to spite their faces if they don't look at the big picture, but what do I know?

The position isn't just a punctuation-and-grammar editing position; it's content-based as well, which is why they want PhDs.

How big a niche is that? And obviously you are better at editing pharma content than, say, Amy, who's perfectly good at editing English--hmm, I don't even know what scale to use for the question, but how do you rate yourself in terms of how much you do get and how much pharmaceutical stuff specifically you can edit?

I have no idea how big a niche it is. As for how I'd rate myself -- I can edit moderately complicated pharmaceutical stuff, but where I get hamstrung is with statistical analysis and pharmacokinetics and such. For example, I know what bioavailability is, and I know general concepts like bioavailability is affected by certain foods, other drugs, renal failure, etc. But I have difficulty with the actual statistics (or statistics in any other area of pharmacy, actually). Which is emphatically not the same as "tee hee, I'm so BAD at math!"