21–30 of 334 posts
I agree. I think Eric S. Raymond nails it: "While sloppy writing does not invariably mean sloppy thinking, we've generally found the correlation to be strong — and we have no use for sloppy thinkers." http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html
Putting comma inside quotation like the above could make grammar nazis happy, but when your newly hired programmer treats all algebraic operations as commutative, it will do no good to your company. Code is not a prose, and coders are not writers.
Now I want to know the following: 1) Will he hire people who can't tell active voice from passive? (Check out the Language Log archives for how many grammar and style nazis can't tell the difference.) 2) Does he require that you can tell who and whom apart and use them in their correct cases? If the answer is "yes" to both of these then I would assume that the people who pass the test are English majors with minors i…
I don't know. I am not a native speaker, and am not an English major, but the answer is "yes" to both of them.
Am I understanding you correctly that you are saying people can't make out active and passive between "I wrote a letter", "A letter was written by me"?
"Who" and "whom" is a bit tricky, but I follow the rule about "who -> he"(who broke the vase? he did), "whom -> him"(whom do you trust? him). There might be edge cases I am unaware of.
Now I want to know the following: 1) Will he hire people who can't tell active voice from passive? (Check out the Language Log archives for how many grammar and style nazis can't tell the difference.) 2) Does he require that you can tell who and whom apart and use them in their correct cases? If the answer is "yes" to both of these then I would assume that the people who pass the test are English majors with minors i…
A friend of mine was an English major who went on to do programming for several startups. He's still a programmer.
It's an incredibly fitting path, especially for him. He's a stickler for detail and writes beautiful code.
This is the take-away point for me: > Everyone says they're detail-oriented in an > application; I just make my employees prove it. CVs are great, certifications and qualifications are great, but if you claim you can do something, I want to see the evidence. When I'm hiring I want to see that the candidate has * ... thought about what I will want and/or need, * ... makes direct claims that they can provide it/them, a…
"Show me you understand the job you're applying for, then provide evidence that you can do it." In return, I ask that an employer provide some substantive description of what I'll be doing, giving me the opportunity to think about it. Actual job posting I saw recently: ---------------- Requirements: * Object Oriented PHP * Efficient in MySQL * Experience with programming logic, great code writing style * Understandin…
"You'll be all by yourself on our website/webapp. A designer will deal with the CSS, but all the rest is up to you"
I am buying a home in need of some repairs, and my real estate agent recommended a contractor whom he has personally used a lot. The contractor inspected the home and prepared a competitively priced five-figure estimate.
From his estimate: "These conditions, if left to deteriate [sic] further, will make the building unsafe. ... The following recommended work is described by catagory [sic]: ... All leaks, disfunctional [sic] faucets & fixtures will be repaired or replaced."
It goes on. I'm shocked a professional would write something like this, especially since it is a MS Word document and so all the misspelled words are conveniently underlined in red.
But my real estate agent thinks I'm making a big deal out of nothing. Anyone have thoughts, experience, opinions, advice?
I do the same: unstructured e-mails, poor grammar and, in general, bad writing style make me reject applicants instantaneously. However, I wonder if I'm letting good candidates go just because of my grammar nazism. How do you (folks in HN with more experience at hiring) feel about this?
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
Yet I doubt we would doubt the authors' intelligence, creativity, and professionalism.
The simple fact is that grammar mistakes and grammar of non-standard dialects is one thing, but an inability to structure an email or other communication is a much bigger deal. You can't fault the guy who learned English as a second language, whose native language has no gendered pronouns and gets confused all the time, and the same goes for non-standard English dialects like AAVE.
So that's where I'd draw the line.