There's a lot of objective evidence that Google is successful in being a good place to work. I assumed it wasn't necessary or productive to re-hash it. They'r

There's a lot of objective evidence that Google is successful in being a good place to work. I assumed it wasn't necessary or productive to re-hash it. They're consistently ranked at the top of various "best companies to work for" lists, blah blah -- and while we all know those are partly a PR game, there's also some truth behind it. The note to which I responded was by someone who had never worked at Google, and was making a large assumption based upon their experience at an unrelated company ("a large health care company in the midwest"). Many of the things in that note are factually incorrect as a basis for comparison ("mediocre benefits, and mediocre pay", said no Google or Facebook engineer, ever). The point raised by hga has more to go on -- I don't know how common it is to be stuck doing things like that -- which is why I gave a more careful response to it. (As an aside, I don't think it adds much to the discussion to make a personal attack or a categorical attack against people based upon their education. I welcome criticism, but it's certainly not fair to judge all Ph.D.s based upon my response, as much as it's not fair to assume that everyone in Kansas City misuses apostrophes based upon yours. :)