I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar • Hacker News Board

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#201

Post by nirvdrum » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 3:56 PM UTC

excuse-me wrote: post #195

gizmo686 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"My issue is if you're unable to delineate between "it's" and "its" and it's the language you've been speaking natively for the past 25 years, I tend to doubt your ability to know what form of "const" to use in C++. At the very least, lack of proofreading suggests to me you might be rash with your code as well." The difference is that const makes sense. "Its" is the plural of "it", although we seem to use "they". "I…

I would say mixing up its and it's is a sign of a good programmer! Apostrophe-s means a possessive most of the time, so logically belonging to it should be it's. programmers like logic, if the English language happens to have case this wrong that's their problem!

I like to amuse myself thinking of people trying to use "her's," "his'," "their's," "our's," or "your's." The possessive form is pretty consistent with pronouns.

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#202

Post by excuse-me » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 3:56 PM UTC

leephillips wrote: post #148

einhverfr wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, I so want to go there, apply, and write at the bottom of the page: "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."…

This is crystal-clear to me. What's the problem?

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.

The grammar rule is that you can remove a clause within the commas - so this becomes:

No Person except a natural born Citizen at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.

So unless you were born sometime before 1776 you aren't going to be hitting the campaign trail

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#203

Post by adavies42 » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 3:57 PM UTC

einhverfr wrote: post #172

aggronn wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you proposing that the constitution be re-written for grammar every couple of decades?

No, but it isn't even clear that the Constitution obeyed perfectly the standards of spelling and grammar of "it's" day.

is it clear that there were any such standards?

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#204

Post by pnathan » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 3:57 PM UTC

irahul wrote: post #17

My train of thoughts: > Everyone who applies for a position at either of my companies, iFixit or Dozuki, takes a mandatory grammar test. Whoa. Who do you think you are - google? What makes you think I am going to sit through your grammar test? If I am agreeing to your grammar test, either you are one of the most desirable places to work for(never heard of you), or economy is about to collapse and this is the only job…

As a programmer - I can't stand working with coworkers who have lousy grammar and communication abilities. Most of my work either is communication, or will require communicating what I did to someone else, or communicating with someone else about what they did.

I can endure the relaxed grammar texts and IMs can use, but in practical & formal terms, I want decent writing and competent communication . I absolutely have zero interest in working with someone who has pathologically bad grammar & writing skills. We need to talk to each other, and grammar is a key component in unambiguous written communication.

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#205

Post by mjwalshe » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 3:59 PM UTC

gizmo686 wrote: post #191

nirvdrum wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My issue is if you're unable to delineate between "it's" and "its" and it's the language you've been speaking natively for the past 25 years, I tend to doubt your ability to know what form of "const" to use in C++. At the very least, lack of proofreading suggests to me you might be rash with your code as well. Many disagree with me on this point of view, but routinely I've found that those that express themselves wel…

>"My issue is if you're unable to delineate between "it's" and "its" and it's the language you've been speaking natively for the past 25 years, I tend to doubt your ability to know what form of "const" to use in C++. At the very least, lack of proofreading suggests to me you might be rash with your code as well." The difference is that const makes sense. "Its" is the plural of "it", although we seem to use "they". "I…

Actulay as a dyslexic I like languages which are exact without all those wierd exceptions that english has.

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#206

Post by huxley » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 3:59 PM UTC

einhverfr wrote: post #172

aggronn wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you proposing that the constitution be re-written for grammar every couple of decades?

No, but it isn't even clear that the Constitution obeyed perfectly the standards of spelling and grammar of "it's" day.

Standards for comma usage weren't established until almost the end of the 19th century. Some people used breathing or personal stylistics to decide on comma use, but there certainly was no general expectation that it would follow grammatical construction or logic.

Compared to some other 18th century documents I've read, the US Constitution is downright spare with commas.

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#207

Post by excuse-me » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 4:00 PM UTC

nirvdrum wrote: post #201

excuse-me wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say mixing up its and it's is a sign of a good programmer! Apostrophe-s means a possessive most of the time, so logically belonging to it should be it's. programmers like logic, if the English language happens to have case this wrong that's their problem!

I like to amuse myself thinking of people trying to use "her's," "his'," "their's," "our's," or "your's." The possessive form is pretty consistent with pronouns.

The reasons for those are interesting - all to do with losing cases when middle English simplified and having to fit a few borrowed Norse words into Old English's German grammar.

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#208

Post by Produce » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 4:03 PM UTC

terryk88a wrote: post #192

irahul wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more like I am applying for a programming job, and I don't see why I have to subject myself to your whims. Consider that instead of grammar, I am advocating I will only hire people who can do 50 push-ups. After all, what can I expect from people who are sloppy towards something as important their own bodies. What's so bad about 50 push-ups? Any fit person(excluding extenuating circumstances) should be able to do…

Absolutely you do not have to subject yourself to his whims. You would be free to walk out the door if you found the grammar test offensive, or the push-ups test, or the rope-skipping test. You do not deserve respect. Ever. You must always earn it.

Oh god. I hate this attitude. Respect is a right, not a privilege. Why should anyone have to earn something so basic? Do we also have to earn our privilege to breathe air? We're all equals and equally deserve respect. Yes, even you after you muttered that banality.

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#209

Post by adavies42 » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 4:03 PM UTC

sigkill wrote: post #128

jfoutz wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even oxford discourages its use in public writing. http://www.ox.ac.uk/public_affairs/services_and_resources/st...

I prefer to use oxford comma where I'm writing a long list of items, and those items contain sets within themselves. For instance, while listing computer brands that include Dell, HP, Acer, Toshiba, Alienware, Compaq and ASUS, I wouldn't use the oxford comma. But if I'm listing out speaker brands like Bose, Klipsch, JBL, Bang and Olufsen, and Altec Lansing, I think oxford comma helps to clarify the meaning intended.

relatedly, there's a little-used rule that lets you use a semi-colon as your list separator if the individual elements contain commas: "My favorite law firms are Dewey, Cheatem & Howe; Robinall, Widowes, & Laffin; and Sue, Grabbitt, & Runne."

Re: I Won't Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar

#210

Post by kwiens » Fri, Jul 20, 2012, 4:05 PM UTC

FourthProtocol wrote: post #110

Even if this ensures a cultural fit I'd not be so binary about grammar. Just a few months ago I helped a government department find an architect. The brief boiled down to someone who can code, but can also liaise with department directors and its vendors, up to CxO level. Clearly grammar and communication ability in general was quite a key requirement. The recruitment process involved submitting a resume and answerin…

I've hired last minute applicants, too, so I understand where you're coming from. We are very happy to make exceptions to the policy in situations like that.

We've hired dyslexic people who have worked out brilliantly. Candidates that don't speak English natively are another exception. We try hard to hire people that can speak multiple languages. (I have found that learning a second language usually makes people better at English grammar.)

We don't expect a perfect score on our grammar test, and that test is one of many deciding factors in our hiring process. Just as we test programming candidates for programming competence, we also test them for writing skills. If you can't FizzBuzz, we're not hiring you. If you can't complete a sentence, we're not hiring you. Beyond that, we use a lot of discretion.