Hello All,
Here is today’s Quiz. Please post your answers as replies.
Replying only to some questions, and replying several times is allowed. Repeating someone’s correct answer is fine but will score lower, unless you add some nice explanations or examples. (So the sooner you get some answers in, the more advantage you have!) Repeating an incorrect answer will give you disadvantage. The winner will be announced next week.
The prize is either a 1 hour sourcing training with me, or two guest passes to future sourcing webinars (the winner’s choice).
Ready?
Tags:
Here are 2 quick answers as i'm pressed for time- will to try to cycle back if my time permits:
Q: If you searched on Google and it shows (about) 13,000 results found, what (if anything) can you conclude from that?
A: Google only gives an 'estimate' when giving numbers of results, you can conclude that you will only see 1,000 results maximum as that is Google's limit;
Q: If you have someones profile on LI, what are some ways to find the person's email address?
A: There are many ways, but one that is highly successful is
In Google:
"email * * companyname.com" (Use quotes & replace companyname with company u want to find)
OR
"*@companyname.com (Use quotes & replace companyname with company u want to find)
In BING:
email NEAR:2 companyname.com (Capitalize NEAR since it's an operator in BING & replace companyname with the actual company/corp u want to find)
Once you obtain the results, start looking for patterns of firstname.lastname@companyname.com or firstinitial.lastname@companyname.com, etc. When you see consistent patterns, you can test the email address to see if it's valid at these sites:
http://mailtester.comhttp://verifyemailaddress.org
Here are some sites that automatically look up email address formats for you (NOTE: They don't have 'all' sites listed):
http://sites.google.com/site/emails4corporations/http://executivebomb.com
Hi everyone,
Great points, Gary. I didn't know about 'executivebomb.com' that's cool.
One warning I'd like to give people about Mailtester/verifyemailaddress - 'verifyemailaddress.org' will tell you an email address exists in cases where a catch all is in place on the mail server. For example, if you were to look at my email address (see my LI, i don't want to post it everywhere) verifyemailaddress.org will say, 'yes, that exists.' similarly, if you type a bunch of gibberish and then add my companies domain, it will also verify the address.
In contrast, mailtester will tell you it can't verify that, which isn't overly helpful, but i think better no info than false info!
Cheers,
J
gary cozin said:
Here are 2 quick answers as i'm pressed for time- will to try to cycle back if my time permits:
Q: If you searched on Google and it shows (about) 13,000 results found, what (if anything) can you conclude from that?
A: Google only gives an 'estimate' when giving numbers of results, you can conclude that you will only see 1,000 results maximum as that is Google's limit;
Q: If you have someones profile on LI, what are some ways to find the person's email address?
A: There are many ways, but one that is highly successful is
In Google:
"email * * companyname.com" (Use quotes & replace companyname with company u want to find)
OR
"*@companyname.com (Use quotes & replace companyname with company u want to find)
In BING:
email NEAR:2 companyname.com (Capitalize NEAR since it's an operator in BING & replace companyname with the actual company/corp u want to find)
Once you obtain the results, start looking for patterns of firstname.lastname@companyname.com or firstinitial.lastname@companyname.com, etc. When you see consistent patterns, you can test the email address to see if it's valid at these sites:
http://mailtester.comhttp://verifyemailaddress.org
Here are some sites that automatically look up email address formats for you (NOTE: They don't have 'all' sites listed):
http://sites.google.com/site/emails4corporations/http://executivebomb.com
1. phone numbers, websites and email addresses
"websites*resume" site:www.linkedin.com inurl:in | inurl:pub -inurl:dir -inurl:jobs
2.?
3. 100%
4. I think the CSE in Google would hone into results reducing junk if searching a particular site.
5. indexes
6. The estimates in Google are not reliable. This doesn't mean your search produce too much JUNK.
7. The first will result with email, and the second gives links associated with the company.
8. "sales manager" "MBA" "software" "Chicago" site:www.linkedin.com "call me at ***" inurl:in | inurl:pub - inurl:dir -inurl:jobs
9. Yes. The basic level viewer can be very limited. By x-raying via search engine a person can pull up last names, experience, and references that might otherwise not be viewable.
10. My guess is | for or.
11. For the company that the person currently works for, find the pattern of the company email: "email**companyname.com" -rfp
Cross reference via Jigsaw or Zoominfo.
1. phone numbers, websites and email addresses
"websites*resume" site:www.linkedin.com inurl:in | inurl:pub -inurl:dir -inurl:jobs
2.?
3. 100%
4. I think the CSE in Google would hone into results reducing junk if searching a particular site.
5. indexes
6. The estimates in Google are not reliable. This doesn't mean your search produce too much JUNK.
7. The first will result with email, and the second gives links associated with the company.
8. "sales manager" "MBA" "software" "Chicago" site:www.linkedin.com "call me at ***" inurl:in | inurl:pub - inurl:dir -inurl:jobs
9. Yes. The basic level viewer can be very limited. By x-raying via search engine a person can pull up last names, experience, and references that might otherwise not be viewable.
10. My guess is | for or.
11. For the company that the person currently works for, find the pattern of the company email: "email**companyname.com" -rfp
Cross reference via Jigsaw or Zoominfo.
Let me try...
Google has some limitations in terms of # of (key)words so that you can add only thirtysomething words into the search box. A Google CSE can contain some pre-selected sites, keywords and/or operators you want to surely use during your search and you will then not need to add them again into your string. With that you can add lot more 'real' keywords into one search.
For instance, if you pre-select to add all of the resume-related keywords and operators into a CSE (such as intitle:(resume OR CV OR vitae) and ext:(pdf OR doc) etc.) then by using this CSE you can focus only on the necessary keywords.
Hope it makes sense?
Balazs
Let me try...
- What can you search for, using a Google custom search engine, that you cannot using the Google search? [Bonus: is there a way to search on Bing using a Google’s CSE?]
Google has some limitations in terms of # of (key)words so that you can add only thirtysomething words into the search box. A Google CSE can contain some pre-selected sites, keywords and/or operators you want to surely use during your search and you will then not need to add them again into your string. With that you can add lot more 'real' keywords into one search.
For instance, if you pre-select to add all of the resume-related keywords and operators into a CSE (such as intitle:(resume OR CV OR vitae) and ext:(pdf OR doc) etc.) then by using this CSE you can focus only on the necessary keywords.
Hope it makes sense?
Balazs
Parenthesis is not listed there maybe because a search string is linear? We used to use it mainly for the OR-related keywords and if Google needs to bring all of these results it does not really make sense to use () any further.
...not more than a simple guess, Irina!
- Take a look at the Google help page: http://bit.ly/rsMDVe. What special character that used to be in Google’s cheat sheet is not listed anymore and why?
Parenthesis is not listed there maybe because a search string is linear? We used to use it mainly for the OR-related keywords and if Google needs to bring all of these results it does not really make sense to use () any further.
...not more than a simple guess, Irina!
There should be many... One is that Google-plus does not realize quads but x-raying can help well you in it.
Sample string:
site:plus.google.com "University of Maryland at College Park"
to compare to: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22University+of+Maryland+at+College...
Hmmm... maybe this one:~? ...as Google automatically searches for synonymes today?
Irina Shamaeva said:
Hint: find a copy of an old cheatsheet that used to be on Google. :)
Balazs Paroczay said:
- Take a look at the Google help page: http://bit.ly/rsMDVe. What special character that used to be in Google’s cheat sheet is not listed anymore and why?
Parenthesis is not listed there maybe because a search string is linear? We used to use it mainly for the OR-related keywords and if Google needs to bring all of these results it does not really make sense to use () any further.
...not more than a simple guess, Irina!
Hmmm... maybe this one:~? ...as Google automatically searches for synonymes today?
Irina Shamaeva said:Hint: find a copy of an old cheatsheet that used to be on Google. :)
Balazs Paroczay said:
- Take a look at the Google help page: http://bit.ly/rsMDVe. What special character that used to be in Google’s cheat sheet is not listed anymore and why?
Parenthesis is not listed there maybe because a search string is linear? We used to use it mainly for the OR-related keywords and if Google needs to bring all of these results it does not really make sense to use () any further.
...not more than a simple guess, Irina!
© 2024 Created by Irina Shamaeva. Powered by