5 ms·

That seems very unlikely. If given a choice between two candidates, equal in capabilities, where one has had some amount of public exposure in the manner descri

That seems very unlikely. If given a choice between two candidates, equal in capabilities, where one has had some amount of public exposure in the manner described, and the other is relatively anonymous, generally the corporation is going to pick the anonymous one. There's no upside to attracting unnecessary, uncontrolled publicity. At best, they'll ignore it. It won't be a net positive unless the hiring company is some kind of issue-oriented non-profit, or the role itself is issue-oriented. Personally, there are some issues I would absolutely fall on my sword for. And there are some I certainly wouldn't. It's your own moral compass.

BurningFrog 11y ago
Most people here are for OP testifying. Many people on HN make hiring decisions. Yes, you can imagine that they would see things differently when actually facing a hiring decision, but my base assumption is that most of them don't.
- TheDong 11y ago
  Before a developer on HN gets the chance to get a say in the decision, an HR filter goes over it. Those people are more risk-averse and this is clearly a company risk.
  - ScottBurson 11y ago
    If my group wanted to hire this person and HR rejected them for this reason, I would quit.
  - late2part 11y ago
    I've worked at 4 big name tech companies. None of the HR departments could block a hire based on these sort of issues. If the applicant fails to pass a background check for issues like criminal, etc, that's different. But some intangible 'industry risk' has never been a veto power that HR gets. I'm sure there's some company out there that could do this, but I haven't seen it.
  - pcl 11y ago
    Given the sorts of candidates that BigCo HR teams tend to let through the process, I'd be pretty surprised if the HR filtration process would actually pick up some random court case, much less act on it.
wpietri 11y ago
I would like to see your data for "generally the corporation is going to pick the anonymous one." Regardless, I personally would favor any candidate who did the right thing in difficult circumstances. I don't hire people who will just go and do whatever I tell them; I've got computers for that. I hire people to help make good things happen. And for that, I need some confidence that when faced with a choice between easy and good, they'll pick good. More than a decade back I was brought into a company to help them experiment with new ways of working. There was one engineer on my team who thought my ideas were nuts. He argued so much that the management offered to give me somebody more tractable. I stuck with him, though, and as he worked in the new approach, he came to appreciate it. By the time I left, he was an unstoppable advocate for improving my client's engineering practices. Over the next few years he made a huge difference there. When I look back upon the best people I've worked with, they're all like that. They're professionals, in the sense of having a strong sense of professional and ethical duty. As far as I'm concerned, one person like that is worth any three over-obedient clock-punchers.

BurningFrog 11y ago

Most people here are for OP testifying. Many people on HN make hiring decisions. Yes, you can imagine that they would see things differently when actually facing a hiring decision, but my base assumption is that most of them don't.

TheDong 11y ago
Before a developer on HN gets the chance to get a say in the decision, an HR filter goes over it. Those people are more risk-averse and this is clearly a company risk.
- ScottBurson 11y ago
  If my group wanted to hire this person and HR rejected them for this reason, I would quit.
- late2part 11y ago
  I've worked at 4 big name tech companies. None of the HR departments could block a hire based on these sort of issues. If the applicant fails to pass a background check for issues like criminal, etc, that's different. But some intangible 'industry risk' has never been a veto power that HR gets. I'm sure there's some company out there that could do this, but I haven't seen it.
- pcl 11y ago
  Given the sorts of candidates that BigCo HR teams tend to let through the process, I'd be pretty surprised if the HR filtration process would actually pick up some random court case, much less act on it.

wpietri 11y ago

I would like to see your data for "generally the corporation is going to pick the anonymous one." Regardless, I personally would favor any candidate who did the right thing in difficult circumstances. I don't hire people who will just go and do whatever I tell them; I've got computers for that. I hire people to help make good things happen. And for that, I need some confidence that when faced with a choice between easy and good, they'll pick good. More than a decade back I was brought into a company to help them experiment with new ways of working. There was one engineer on my team who thought my ideas were nuts. He argued so much that the management offered to give me somebody more tractable. I stuck with him, though, and as he worked in the new approach, he came to appreciate it. By the time I left, he was an unstoppable advocate for improving my client's engineering practices. Over the next few years he made a huge difference there. When I look back upon the best people I've worked with, they're all like that. They're professionals, in the sense of having a strong sense of professional and ethical duty. As far as I'm concerned, one person like that is worth any three over-obedient clock-punchers.