Dear John,

By any fair measure that I can think of, ERE is the leader in publishing information for recruiters online ? your bread and butter.  You?re an aggressive guy, so I expect a fair share of competitively-inspired snark from you, and I am rarely disappointed. 

Usually I ignore it, because I understand.

You act out to get attention. 

This morning, you crossed a line - your comments were personal, venomous and unfair.  They also showed that you have no understanding of what ERE is all about - or perhaps that you just don?t care and would rather get in your cheap shots.

You take issue with Lou Adler?s piece ?Ethics, Poaching and Competitive Intelligence?, published in the ER Daily on September 30^th, 2005. 

As you know, Lou?s piece is part of an ongoing debate on our site and within our industry over ethics, morality and aggressiveness.

John Sullivan's original article on FirstMerit, the vibrant discussion that ensued, his follow-up piece to the first article, Heather Hamilton's counterpoint, and the thoughts that Lou Adler contributed to the discussion have created one of the best dialogues on an important, controversial topic in our industry that I have seen in years. Outside of ERE, the debate was continued on your site, Nick?s Ask the Headhunter and several blogs. 

It?s a topic that goes to the heart of how people see themselves ? their morality, professionalism and aggressiveness ? so it?s not surprising that people feel very strongly about these issues.  Some of the best minds in our industry and its most well-regarded practitioners vehemently disagree about where the boundary between ethical and aggressive recruiting practices lies.

All along, ERE has given air to all sides of this debate.  We are doing our best to foster discussion and the exchange of ideas, not to lobby for or insinuate my personal point of view or anybody else?s.

The tactics referred to in Lou?s article are widely used within the industry ? you can think they are low, you may not like them, but to ignore that they are out there is to ignore reality.  Just because the topic is controversial, and the debate heated, does not mean that we should shrink from it.  In the end, society decides what acceptable behavior is by debating it, not sweeping it under the rug.

Your attempt to personally tar me for publishing one side of this debate ? particularly without even mentioning the huge diversity of opinion that ERE has fostered - is shameful.

For the record, I absolutely stand by Lou Adler -- and by that I don't mean his point of view, which remains his own, but rather his contributions, both now and over years, to the dialogue that's taken place on ERE. I also stand by Heather Hamilton of Microsoft, who took the time recently to publish a contrary point of view that espoused the virtues of honesty and openness in all recruiting endeavors. I stand by Dick Feam, whose critical comments on Lou's article were published in today's ER Daily, alongside comments from Maureen and Lou himself.

No apology for any of their comments or viewpoints will be forthcoming.

Unlike you, John, I am unafraid to open up ERE and myself to comments from our audience, and I regularly give voice to those with whom I disagree personally.

When will you do the same?

Yours truly,

David Manaster

President

Electronic Recruiting Exchange, Inc.