4 ms·
That's under "Ideally", not "Requirements". But yeah, I think that's a great idea.
by storborg 16y ago
That's under "Ideally", not "Requirements". But yeah, I think that's a great idea.
- raganwald 16y agoI agree with both of your points. The conventional wisdom is that the best predictor of future performance is past results. Since this job's responsibilities are to "Provide service to Path users through email, Get Satisfaction, Twitter, Quora and other mediums," experience using these mediums is obviously ideal. That doesn't necessarily translate to other jobs, but this is one case that seems fairly sound.
- catshirt 16y agosure, but there's a pretty literal difference between something being a requirement, and something not being a requirement.
- raganwald 16y agoI said I agreed with both of the parent's points, namely: 1. That's under "Ideally", not "Requirements". 2. I think that's a great idea. :-)
- catshirt 16y agoAh- of course I did see that- but I misinterpreted the rest as a "I agree, but you could consider it a requirement because...". Rereading it I realize that's not the case. Cheers!
- davemorin 16y agoWe should probably have made this a requirement. I'll push a change now :) Also, thank you for the kind words on this. We think it is an important part of the responsibilities for this post at Path.