I agree to a certain extent that seeing examples of work reduces recruiting risk, but I disagree that looking for people spending "every waking hour" programmin

I agree to a certain extent that seeing examples of work reduces recruiting risk, but I disagree that looking for people spending "every waking hour" programming is something positive. If I am interviewing people then I would try to avoid this line of thinking (i.e. how much time is spent out of work programming) as it strikes me as unfair. My reasons are that not all candidates could spend every waking hour of their time even if they wanted to for various legitimate reasons. For example if you are a parent looking after a baby/toddler, it would be totally unreasonable to expect you to be coding "every waking hour". If you had two candidates that were 100% equal except one had no real non-work-commitments of note and spent their evenings messing around on github, and the other was a parent who wanted to code all night but had to look after their kids in the evenings, which would you pick? If you picked the non-parent based only on the non-work github commits are you descriminating someone based on the fact they have kids? I dunno - but I thinik it would need careful consideration. As I said - I dunno, but it strikes me as this would be an unfair thing to look for. Afterall, you're recruiting fill a role, not recruiting a lifestyle.