41–50 of 57 posts
Next challenge: trying to figure out which country goes with which color on your pie chart. Use this to screen for the designer you need.
I don't understand why people use pie charts. They are confusing, misleading, and don't fit nicely into square divs.
I apologize to anyone who thought our post was callous; definitely not what we intended. Let me try to better articulate what we were trying to convey... If you post a developer job on Monster, you're likely to get over 500 resumes. Over 95% of them (I'm using that number literally, not figuratively) are from people who shouldn't have applied if they'd read the job description carefully. Reading through those resumes…
What bothered me was that it sounded like you were mocking people for trying but failing to solve your puzzle, and relishing in the fact that you didn't have to consider their application. Trying is a good thing, even if it ends in failure, and it should be encouraged.
It might even turn out that the sort of person who spends an afternoon trying to solve a challenging puzzle makes a great employee after a bit of training.
I didn't even know about the challenge until today, but trying it just now made me realize that Chromium's built in dev tools are lacking some must-have functionality.
Many spent an entire afternoon working on this thing without success. I hope they liked the challenge, but I’m also glad we didn’t have to use our internal resources reviewing their resume. How fucking pretentious can you get? Maybe they were busy, maybe they had kids to take care of, maybe they were documenting their steps vs. flailing around. Glad I don't work in the valley if this is the kind of attitudes "rocksta…
I don't understand the outrage. Some completed this in 7-8 minutes . That's quite a difference from spending hours without a result. Add a few of these problems up (which I hope are representative of actual skills) and you're looking at minutes vs. days. Sure, the aside on resources comes off a bit flippant -- but it doesn't mean it's untrue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If they don't already know everything then they are idiots that you want nothing to do with." Well, why should a startup want anything to do with someone who needs training? A startup needs to get as much as possible out of its resources, including individual employees and time. Given that, and all else being equal, it just makes more sense to hire the people with a decent understanding of HTTP for a position relate…
I agree, the ideal candidate, particularly for a startup, would have a wealth of knowledge and experience in addition to the drive to challenge themselves and the ability to learn new things. The problem that startups face is that they can't usually hire those people because someone like Google or Facebook is paying them with truckloads of gold. Not always of course, sometimes startups can attract those people and it…
1) You are saying too much. Saying stuff about looking for the best is obviously your purpose, so no need to say that. Now, you are left defending yourself about being Jerk. For somethings, it is best just to give the facts.
2) Why aren't you hiring developers from your network?
3) You should try to come off as "We are awesome, and we want you to be awesome too.", not "We are awesome and you are not".
I apologize to anyone who thought our post was callous; definitely not what we intended. Let me try to better articulate what we were trying to convey... If you post a developer job on Monster, you're likely to get over 500 resumes. Over 95% of them (I'm using that number literally, not figuratively) are from people who shouldn't have applied if they'd read the job description carefully. Reading through those resumes…
I think we all agree that it can be very useful to filter applicants by making them solve some puzzle, and there's nothing wrong with that. What bothered me was that it sounded like you were mocking people for trying but failing to solve your puzzle, and relishing in the fact that you didn't have to consider their application. Trying is a good thing, even if it ends in failure, and it should be encouraged. It might e…
I think it's the job of the future employer to "waste their time" finding and filtering people rather than getting applicants to waste their time applying. I've solved quite few puzzles in my day. What irked me was getting chosen for my solutions and then getting rejected for other, arbitrary criteria.
An employer generally has more leverage in a transaction like this, let them put in some effort in compensation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you notice that you framed your statement as a question and thereby made it more persuasive?
It turns out that it's more effective if you do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or perhaps they consider the skills needed to pass the test easily to be the bare minimum needed for the job, and anyone who can't pass it quickly isn't qualified (but hey, if you learned something from it, good for you!).
Could it be that the issue here is not whether they used a test to filter applicants, but the tone in which they describe their satisfaction with the result?
But I've noticed a pattern, which is that folks who talk a lot about using these tests talk in this rather offensive way. It makes me think that companies that start off with these test have somewhat abusive attitude towards their employees - "we don't mind making you jump through hoops so we don't have to". Might not be a signal this is a great place to work.
Maybe the company could promise to solve a puzzle I submitted if I solved their puzzle? It might seem fairer.