I don't hire unlucky people • Hacker News Board

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#101

Post by sedev » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:21 PM UTC

raganwald wrote: post #92

roryokane wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dislike the story form too, and I can explain why. The style gives the impression that Reginald is claiming "this really happened, and those people used this technique, and they lived happily ever after – so if it worked for them, it will work for you; give this technique a try". But this tale never happened, so that implied argument is a lie. This story forces me to put on my "disbelieve, disbelieve, disbelieve" m…

The style gives the impression that Raganwald is claiming "this really happened, and those people used this technique, and they lived happily ever after – so if it worked for them, it will work for you; give this technique a try Respectfully, no it doesn’t. Try showing the story to one hundred randomly selected people and ask whether they think this really happened. I think you will find that there are a few people w…

I probably wouldn't have copped to it quite as fast if you hadn't named one of the characters Bertie Wooster, which was a lovely bit of signaling. Good job there.

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#102

Post by TheBoff » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:21 PM UTC

DarkShikari wrote: post #10

This article is superb. We tried placing ads for ninjas, rock stars, and so on, but I discovered this was the cultural equivalent of advertising for white males who drink dry martinis. Not that white males who drink dry martinis can’t do the job, but there’s no real difference between advertising for a Ninja and throwing half your resumés away because you don’t like unlucky people. Either way, you end up with fewer r…

This reminds me of that job advert which specifically asked for programmers with MacBooks only. No way in a million years would I apply there! I have an iMac, but only because I'm interested in different sorts of computer. I mean seriously, not everyone can afford an Mac.

I've had this on my chest since I saw that advert. Just needed to vent :)

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#103

Post by roguecoder » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:23 PM UTC

davidkatz wrote: post #47

yajoe wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took a look at skills app -- I like the approach and the clean layout, but a couple thoughts from this hiring manager: * Most of the really good devs I know and hire do not bother with easy metrics like number of tweets, followers, or StackOverflow points. They are perfect to paste together on summary reports and look "complete," but their absolute values or essence don't mean anything. * The high numbers on public…

Perhaps I can try to convince you of our long term vision: developers increasingly take their work online, which results in a mountain of professional data. A lot of it is meaningless, but some of it can be woven into interesting stories. We're still trying to find the best approach to this, but in essence, our mission is making sense of this data. Some of this will have nothing to do with popularity - say, we might…

I think the problem I have is that it is not the case that "developers" are taking their work on line. It is the case that "some developers" are taking their work online.

If all you care about is that subset of developers, I'm sure your approach is fine.

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#104

Post by devs1010 » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:23 PM UTC

raganwald wrote: post #57

rizzom5000 wrote: post #53

While I enjoyed the article and its message, I found the spelling error on the resume example underwhelming. A professional's resume is the veneer they present to strangers. It's like the login page for your app. Do you want a spelling error there when it is so easy to avoid? It screams sloppy and lazy in the same sentence. Maybe the general quality of professional devs is so bad that sloppiness and laziness are bett…

What is the difference between a spelling mistake and failing to wear a tie to an interview? I suggest nothing except for cultural standards. Once upon a time, they were both punishable by immediate removal from the process. Today one is tolerated but the other not tolerated. they both signal the same thing: “I meticulously went over my presentation to ensure that it meets your expectations.” Let’s be clear: I think…

I'm not quite sure I follow.. are you suggesting that not wearing a tie would mean "removal from the process", even today? I've never worn a tie to a programming interview and generally it seems most experienced developers don't, at least in on the west coast of the US

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#105

Post by jack-r-abbit » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:25 PM UTC

I'm not sure I agree with putting people who can't put together a resume without spelling/grammar mistakes into the same unlucky group that simply had their resumes tossed by chance. Having spelling and grammar mistakes on a resume is sloppy... not unlucky. At a minimum it indicates they may not pay attention to details when it really matters. But maybe that is just me. Or maybe it just doesn't matter on a resume anymore. I'll admit I've never had to whittle down a stack of 100 resumes... more like 10 so I would never just blindly throw half away. But as I skim them all, the ones with the spelling and grammar mistakes get set into the "second string" pile. I'll give them a second look if the deeper dive into the other pile still doesn't find The One. I've had it work both ways. Some times second string does have The One. And other times second string is never looked at again.

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#106

Post by jack-r-abbit » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:29 PM UTC

joshAg wrote: post #80

cookiecaper wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. My ad scoring program deducts 5 points and transparently kills off ads that contain terms like "ninja" and "rock star" because to my mind they indicate a propensity for either abuse ("a rock star should be able to code this in three days!!") or fad-following ineptitude ("rock stars are the coolest kind of programmers, I must have them! also, we write EVERYTHING in Ruby, it's like the Mac of programming").

my typical response to ads for rockstars is pointing out that rockstars tend to earn 10 to 100 times more than a great studio musician and generally have to be the prima donna all the time. Then I ask if forcing myself to be the center of attention is part of the job description, and just how much better the position pays compared to the typical valley salary.

Along that same lines... you never see a good ninja. So if I'm hired under the guise of being a ninja you can expect to never see me in the office. So telecommuting would be expected?

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#107

Post by cosecant » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:31 PM UTC

jamesli wrote: post #76

DarkShikari wrote: post #10

This article is superb. We tried placing ads for ninjas, rock stars, and so on, but I discovered this was the cultural equivalent of advertising for white males who drink dry martinis. Not that white males who drink dry martinis can’t do the job, but there’s no real difference between advertising for a Ninja and throwing half your resumés away because you don’t like unlucky people. Either way, you end up with fewer r…

When I was open to new job opportunities, I immediately turned it down if the job description included words like rock starts, ninjas, etc. I am not against the mindset. It is just not a good fit to my personality. I want to work on products that I consider meaningful and work with good and serious engineers. It is nice to hang out with colleagues, have drinks, saying jokes, etc. I am a big fan of classic rock. But c…

Job descriptions just shouldn't have "rock star" or "ninja" unless they are hired on their ability to perform music in front of an audience or on their katana wielding skills.

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#108

Post by excuse-me » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:32 PM UTC

jamesli wrote: post #76

DarkShikari wrote: post #10

This article is superb. We tried placing ads for ninjas, rock stars, and so on, but I discovered this was the cultural equivalent of advertising for white males who drink dry martinis. Not that white males who drink dry martinis can’t do the job, but there’s no real difference between advertising for a Ninja and throwing half your resumés away because you don’t like unlucky people. Either way, you end up with fewer r…

When I was open to new job opportunities, I immediately turned it down if the job description included words like rock starts, ninjas, etc. I am not against the mindset. It is just not a good fit to my personality. I want to work on products that I consider meaningful and work with good and serious engineers. It is nice to hang out with colleagues, have drinks, saying jokes, etc. I am a big fan of classic rock. But c…

The more useful data is that any ad that uses such language doesn't actually employ any ninjas or rockstars.

At best it has an HR person who never managed to stop being 17years old, typically it's a bunch of trend following losers, at worst it's a bunch of creeps who think they can under-pay and over-work you in return for having a pinball table in the corner.

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#109

Post by joshAg » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:34 PM UTC

jack-r-abbit wrote: post #106

joshAg wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my typical response to ads for rockstars is pointing out that rockstars tend to earn 10 to 100 times more than a great studio musician and generally have to be the prima donna all the time. Then I ask if forcing myself to be the center of attention is part of the job description, and just how much better the position pays compared to the typical valley salary.

Along that same lines... you never see a good ninja. So if I'm hired under the guise of being a ninja you can expect to never see me in the office. So telecommuting would be expected?

if you don't mind, I'm going to borrow that line from you...

Re: I don't hire unlucky people

#110

Post by sounds » Thu, Apr 05, 2012, 10:36 PM UTC

roguecoder wrote: post #100

cousin_it wrote: post #9

So the most efficient interviewing process for the employer is also the nicest to candidates? What a curious coincidence. Are you sure there was no wishful thinking involved in writing this post?

Right now it's a candidate's market (unless you actually suck). The best chance companies that would like to hire me now had was seven years ago when my resume was thin and unconventional but my code was solid. Now that my background conventional (except for the lack of a related degree) they are falling all over themselves, and I am quite content in a brilliant job making more than most of them are willing to pay. I…

I totally agree.

If I understood your comment, basically, "treating candidates with respect - especially inexperienced/unconventional candidates - allows hiring if you already know how to find great candidates"

I've seen a ton of benefits to treating candidates _and_ employees well.

• Many employees will prefer to stay in a job where they are treated well (despite taking a hit in lifestyle / pay) [1]

• Establishing a "social contract" with your employees provides some protection against managers who might drive away high-value candidates / employees

• During tough pivots (the current economic climate tends to produce this), a core of effective employees can execute while mediocre employees will flounder

[1] http://freem.vmth.ucdavis.edu/~saintly/bio/portrait.html