4 ms·

It didn't list every language we work in. Working in all of them wasn't even a requirement for the job, so no, it's not inaccurate. I personally would have put

by kodah 4y ago

It didn't list every language we work in. Working in all of them wasn't even a requirement for the job, so no, it's not inaccurate. I personally would have put that on there, but it's not substantive to the outcome and as I stated earlier I usually found out people lied before we even talked about all the other languages that engineers could work in. The rest of your post is just rambling. That's not why people lie, and there's a big difference between exaggeration and outright lying. You seem to have zero delineation in your head between this, which is frankly unsurprising given the interactions I've had with you here.

lapcat 4y ago
Me: "the biggest liars and cheats rise to the top" You: "When I was in charge of hiring I dealt with this every day. A huge swath of software engineers lie about their skills, involvement in projects, and just general accomplishments." Also you: "Contrast that with someone having Kubernetes all over their resume only to find out they've pushed a button on an automated deploy pipeline and don't know the difference between a Deployment and a StatefulSet. The latter I consider a lie." You later: "there's a big difference between exaggeration and outright lying. You seem to have zero delineation in your head between this"
- kodah 4y ago
  Yeah, someone who has Kubernetes all over their resume but has only clicked a button on an automated deploy pipeline that doesn't know the difference between a deployment and stateful set is a liar. This is what I referred to as "the latter" The part of the quote you chopped off: > If you tell me, "I haven't worked on Kubernetes before, but I've worked on distributed systems and have messed with a lot of REST apis." I'd be understanding, no one can have all the right experience at once. If you have Kubernetes on your resume and this is what I find, that's an exaggeration. This is what would be "the former". Anyway, I now realize reading through your comments why this conversation was a waste of my time. Have a nice day.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    > The part of the quote you chopped off: And the part of your own quote that you chopped off: "To me there's a very big integrity difference between lying and applying for a role which you don't meet all the requirements." That's not a difference between exaggeration and lying, it's a difference between honesty and lying. Where exactly is the exaggeration? > I now realize reading through your comments that you're the kind of person that tries to vouch for flame bait and then complains about it. I've clearly wasted my time here. Heh. Are you referring to this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34849006 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34849006 The commenter posted a link: "see his rebuttal here: https://tessier-lavigne-lab.stanford.edu/news/false-allegations-stanford-daily https://tessier-lavigne-lab.stanford.edu/news/false-allegati..." I said: "I've vouched for this comment. Not sure why it was flagged. Regardless of whether you believe Tessier-Lavigne's denial, it's directly relevant to the story." The link was not flame bait, it was simply the accused person's response to the accusation. Now, in retrospect it does turn out to the case that the commenter has engaged in flamebait in other comments. I did not vouch for those other comments, nor was I even aware of them beforehand. I didn't look at the commenter's bio or other comments before I vouched for that one particular comment, which was simply a link, a very relevant link. Thus, your criticism of me is totally unwarranted and ridiculous. You're grasping at straws here. [EDIT:] I noticed that you've edited your comment to remove the part about vouching. Have a nice day to you too!

by kodah 4y ago

lapcat 4y ago

Me: "the biggest liars and cheats rise to the top" You: "When I was in charge of hiring I dealt with this every day. A huge swath of software engineers lie about their skills, involvement in projects, and just general accomplishments." Also you: "Contrast that with someone having Kubernetes all over their resume only to find out they've pushed a button on an automated deploy pipeline and don't know the difference between a Deployment and a StatefulSet. The latter I consider a lie." You later: "there's a big difference between exaggeration and outright lying. You seem to have zero delineation in your head between this"

kodah 4y ago
Yeah, someone who has Kubernetes all over their resume but has only clicked a button on an automated deploy pipeline that doesn't know the difference between a deployment and stateful set is a liar. This is what I referred to as "the latter" The part of the quote you chopped off: > If you tell me, "I haven't worked on Kubernetes before, but I've worked on distributed systems and have messed with a lot of REST apis." I'd be understanding, no one can have all the right experience at once. If you have Kubernetes on your resume and this is what I find, that's an exaggeration. This is what would be "the former". Anyway, I now realize reading through your comments why this conversation was a waste of my time. Have a nice day.
- lapcat 4y ago
  > The part of the quote you chopped off: And the part of your own quote that you chopped off: "To me there's a very big integrity difference between lying and applying for a role which you don't meet all the requirements." That's not a difference between exaggeration and lying, it's a difference between honesty and lying. Where exactly is the exaggeration? > I now realize reading through your comments that you're the kind of person that tries to vouch for flame bait and then complains about it. I've clearly wasted my time here. Heh. Are you referring to this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34849006 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34849006 The commenter posted a link: "see his rebuttal here: https://tessier-lavigne-lab.stanford.edu/news/false-allegations-stanford-daily https://tessier-lavigne-lab.stanford.edu/news/false-allegati..." I said: "I've vouched for this comment. Not sure why it was flagged. Regardless of whether you believe Tessier-Lavigne's denial, it's directly relevant to the story." The link was not flame bait, it was simply the accused person's response to the accusation. Now, in retrospect it does turn out to the case that the commenter has engaged in flamebait in other comments. I did not vouch for those other comments, nor was I even aware of them beforehand. I didn't look at the commenter's bio or other comments before I vouched for that one particular comment, which was simply a link, a very relevant link. Thus, your criticism of me is totally unwarranted and ridiculous. You're grasping at straws here. [EDIT:] I noticed that you've edited your comment to remove the part about vouching. Have a nice day to you too!