4 ms·

But what if you're looking to hire people who go outside sometimes and can talk to people and can write code too? Or should that be illegal?

by aje403 8y ago

talmand 8y ago
Now we're tacking on an additional aspect of the job that we didn't know about before. If the job requires a social interaction with people outside of the company then, of course, it becomes a factor. Let's not be silly in an effort to just be right and prove someone else wrong.
- aje403 8y ago
  People exist inside the company too, and sometimes when you are employed there, you need to have "social interactions" with those people, even if a lot of your time is spent writing code. I'm sorry, I'm not going to be polite - I think you are a complete moron if you believe companies should re-tailor their interview process to specifically suit people with anxiety attacks and no social skills
  - droidist2 8y ago
    They should if they want those people, if not then don't. But if you don't, you shouldn't also complain there's a shortage of skilled people.
newnewpdro 8y ago
It's not like you forego the in-person interview and don't learn what you can from that. The point is, by including a take-home portion of the technical interview you can get a better sense of the individual's technical abilities. If, in addition to what seems to be a technically competent individual, you find they don't perform well in-person, then you take that data and weigh it against where your priorities lie for the position. There's a huge difference in knowing "technically great, performs poorly with an audience" vs. "technically poor, but we only tested them with an audience". Furthermore, it's not uncommon for people who experience anxiety during the in-person to loosen up as they acclimate to the office environment and their peers. These people can actually be some of the best contributors, and it can be a very costly mistake to misjudge them. This personality type tends to be quite loyal and averse to changing positions, because the whole process of interviewing and acclimating to a new environment is so stressful to them. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder in this discussion, are you having a bad day?
- aje403 8y ago
  Not at all, I'm enjoying myself and the debate (while finding it kafkaesque that people are finding ways to defend failing fizzbuzz on an interview). How are you doing today? That might be the only legitimate point I've read in this chain so far - if you hire people too socially impaired to write fizzbuzz, they'll be less likely to job hop.

But what if you're looking to hire people who go outside sometimes and can talk to people and can write code too? Or should that be illegal?

by aje403 8y ago

But what if you're looking to hire people who go outside sometimes and can talk to people and can write code too? Or should that be illegal?

talmand 8y ago

Now we're tacking on an additional aspect of the job that we didn't know about before. If the job requires a social interaction with people outside of the company then, of course, it becomes a factor. Let's not be silly in an effort to just be right and prove someone else wrong.

aje403 8y ago
People exist inside the company too, and sometimes when you are employed there, you need to have "social interactions" with those people, even if a lot of your time is spent writing code. I'm sorry, I'm not going to be polite - I think you are a complete moron if you believe companies should re-tailor their interview process to specifically suit people with anxiety attacks and no social skills
- droidist2 8y ago
  They should if they want those people, if not then don't. But if you don't, you shouldn't also complain there's a shortage of skilled people.

newnewpdro 8y ago

It's not like you forego the in-person interview and don't learn what you can from that. The point is, by including a take-home portion of the technical interview you can get a better sense of the individual's technical abilities. If, in addition to what seems to be a technically competent individual, you find they don't perform well in-person, then you take that data and weigh it against where your priorities lie for the position. There's a huge difference in knowing "technically great, performs poorly with an audience" vs. "technically poor, but we only tested them with an audience". Furthermore, it's not uncommon for people who experience anxiety during the in-person to loosen up as they acclimate to the office environment and their peers. These people can actually be some of the best contributors, and it can be a very costly mistake to misjudge them. This personality type tends to be quite loyal and averse to changing positions, because the whole process of interviewing and acclimating to a new environment is so stressful to them. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder in this discussion, are you having a bad day?

aje403 8y ago
Not at all, I'm enjoying myself and the debate (while finding it kafkaesque that people are finding ways to defend failing fizzbuzz on an interview). How are you doing today? That might be the only legitimate point I've read in this chain so far - if you hire people too socially impaired to write fizzbuzz, they'll be less likely to job hop.