Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs • Hacker News Board

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#61

Post by rorrr » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 5:40 PM UTC

simonh wrote: post #54

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? Its not the same engineer expecting cost-of-living increases. Its an ever-more-experienced engineer growing from newbie to architect. Quadrupling every 10 years seems about right to me.

So by retirement a 20 year old starter on $50k (a little low) should expect to be on $200k by age 30 (which I accept isn't at all impossible for a smart kid), and retire on around $12.8 million a year.... I'm clearly doing something wrong, or the job market here in the UK is a lot more different than in the US than I assumed.

First of all, I don't expect a raise of 15% annually. 5-10% would do, if it does happen every year (assuming they like my work). Second, you forgot the inflation.

$50K -> 200K growth in 10 years is possible, there's nothing extraordinary about it, but currently the only way to do it is to switch jobs.

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#62

Post by k3n » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 7:24 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #57

k3n wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's unfair, just because you may have some axe to grind with Reddit doesn't mean that it's not a good source of information and discussion. SO works great for some formats, but as a discussion board, it sucks. The question that was posed had no clear answer, we could all wax poetic on the pathology and prognosis and cure of the OP's problem, but there's only 1 big green checkmark to go around -- and when i…

You weight the intent system too highly and ignore the effect on the reader. SO's interface worked pretty well for opinion. Who cares if it's impossible to accurately score? The most useful stuff generally ended up near the top, so readers could quickly find a lot of good material. As to the green checkmark, a querent isn't obligated to select a best answer. And if they selected one, so what? It pushed one answer up,…

They even state when you go to ask a question:

> We prefer questions that can be answered, not just discussed.

And to me (and this is of course just my interpretation), but that means that questions that can only yield subjective answers aren't really meant to be asked there.

Additionally, the FAQ[1] goes into even more detail that I think supports both my and SE's stance; the question ITT is, to me, clearly more under the "and it is not about..." section of the FAQ than it is under the top section.

They even plug another of their sites, The Workplace[2], as being a better fit for "general workplace issues, office politics, résumé help".

Point being, the question the OP asked here has absolutely nothing to do with programming, and thus doesn't have any place on a site that deals exclusively with programming.

1. http://programmers.stackexchange.com/faq

2. http://workplace.stackexchange.com/

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#63

Post by k3n » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 7:29 PM UTC

bunderbunder wrote: post #53

k3n wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's unfair, just because you may have some axe to grind with Reddit doesn't mean that it's not a good source of information and discussion. SO works great for some formats, but as a discussion board, it sucks. The question that was posed had no clear answer, we could all wax poetic on the pathology and prognosis and cure of the OP's problem, but there's only 1 big green checkmark to go around -- and when i…

You're right, as a discussion board it does suck. But as a place to ask advice from other experts and get a feel for how they're inclined to think about the issue, it's absolutely fantastic. And the reason why it's such a great platform for that kind of thing is that the interface goes to such great lengths to discourage drawn-out discussion. By making it hard for argumentative people to dominate the topic, it makes…

But for "this sort of question", is Reddit really that bad for it? I agree that Reddit is a terrible platform for general Q&A content (like SO/SE currently host), but I think it's terrific for subjective content that may include many diverse opinions which might lead to many back-and-forth, threaded discussions which SO basically refuses to support (you can post a tweet-sized comment, but that's about it).

I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't discuss bigger-picture ideas, but I just think that sites that were built to function more like discussion boards are better suited for such topics vs. sites that were created with the sole intention of discovering a single, "correct" answer to every question.

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#64

Post by yrizos » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 9:15 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #60

bluedanieru wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://programmers.stackexchange.com/faq It's not 'anything goes', however. This is a close call, but I agree with the closing in that the post conflicted with the rules. It's possible it could have been worded better to avoid being closed, but even general employee retention strategies don't belong on that site. The problem isn't that they don't allow discussion, it's that the range of topics allowed is so narrow. T…

It was closed at "not constructive", which is obviously thought untrue by the hundreds of people who engaged with it. So I can't agree with the specific closing. It is a mystery to me why a question that yields some answers that are directly about engineers and some that could apply more widely could be considered off topic. One answer explicitly cites the Joel Test. Another specifically discussed the economics of so…

Hundreds of people engaging in a question is actually a very good hint that it's Not Constructive (just a hint though). Remember, Programmers and every other Stack Exchange site are about questions and answers, not discussions.

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#65

Post by yrizos » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 9:21 PM UTC

tikhonj wrote: post #27

therealarmen wrote: post #5

An interesting question on a relevant topic? Let's close it. Thanks, SO mods.

There are already far too many answers to the question--more wouldn't really help anything. Any new answers--even really good ones--would just get lost in the noise. Apart from posting answers, there really isn't much else restricted by the question's being closed. I really think it is not a big deal.

And a few deleted ones. "Sounds like your friend is a bit of a dick. Noone wants to work for him." is one of them (yeap, just that), the whole thread was turning to crap. Closing is only meant to prevent further answers, and this one was deteriorating fast.

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#66

Post by yrizos » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 9:33 PM UTC

S4M wrote: post #38

simonh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But to them they're not abusing it, they're just interpreting the rules very literally and strictly. The problem is that any gameified system, like a karma or reputation system, attracts people good at interpreting rules strictly and finding efficient ways to exploit them. So you're actually selecting for literalist rules lawyers.

Apart from giving them a feel of a power, what does the fact of closing a thread (whether legitimately or not) give to the mods? Do they have some karma incentive to do so?

There's no incentive in closing a question, other than helping the site reach it's goals, and the primary goal for any Stack Exchange site is useful, not interesting or popular (not that they are mutually exclusive, but also not to be confused).

This specific question was turning into crap fast, with answers like "Sounds like your friend is a bit of a dick. Noone wants to work for him." (since deleted). Closing it only prevents further answers, as it was obvious they were deteriorating. Still, the closure and any closure, is reversible, people always have the choice to vote to re-open if they feel the closure wasn't justified.

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#67

Post by eru » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 10:08 PM UTC

praptak wrote: post #29

vetler wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone once told me that the easiest way to get a higher salary will always be to get a new job, and I believe this to be true - either your salary at your new job will be higher, or your current employer will increase your salary to keep you since you have another job offer.

> ... or your current employer will increase your salary to keep you since you have another job offer. Accepting a counter offer is almost never a good decision. The old employer is probably only buying time before replacing you. Even if this is not the case: You stay at a company that only pays you fair money when you threaten to leave. You look disloyal to the old company (see point 1, even if not now you might get…

I heard that reasoning, too. But couldn't it be still a good strategy? You accept the counteroffer, but go jobhunting again from a higher base.

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#68

Post by eru » Mon, Sep 10, 2012, 10:13 PM UTC

antidoh wrote: post #18

Andaith wrote: post #2

I recently read on HN about how Stack Overflow is being taken over by the editors and that questions are being closed all too often. Is this an example of that? "this might cause debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion." is a bad set of reasons to close a question. Surely that's the desired result? If people start behaving like children, close the question, but until then, let the discussion grow... I thin…

> I'd be leery of joining a company with such high turnover. But how do you find out if turnover is high? Just ask, I suppose, but a manager is going to try to downplay it, since he's selling the company to you. Hit or miss whether workers will be truthful about it, between wanting to be team players and not telling tales out of school. I'm leaving a place with high turnover now. I had no idea. Although I could have…

Don't ask directly about turnover. Ask about average time people stay there. (Depending on your formulation of the question, you give them an opportunity to brag about how much they are growing and thus having new-ish people.)

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#69

Post by davvid » Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 2:39 AM UTC

tyrmored wrote: post #10

http://leisuretown.com/library/qac/8.jpg

The original comic is quite entertaining (if you don't mind silly/inappropriate humor). It's called "QA Confidential", and tells the story of how to get a job in QA and milk it for all it's worth. It was written during the heyday of the dot-com boom and nicely captured some of its irrational exuberance.

http://leisuretown.com/library/qac/

Re: Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs

#70

Post by wpietri » Tue, Sep 11, 2012, 6:49 AM UTC

yrizos wrote: post #64

wpietri wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was closed at "not constructive", which is obviously thought untrue by the hundreds of people who engaged with it. So I can't agree with the specific closing. It is a mystery to me why a question that yields some answers that are directly about engineers and some that could apply more widely could be considered off topic. One answer explicitly cites the Joel Test. Another specifically discussed the economics of so…

Hundreds of people engaging in a question is actually a very good hint that it's Not Constructive (just a hint though). Remember, Programmers and every other Stack Exchange site are about questions and answers, not discussions.

We have deeply different ideas of what constructive means.