What many fail to understand is that disinterest in Github absolutely does not tell you anything meaningful about that programmer.
Too many hiring managers/recruiters/HR people focus only on the first point, as some sort of religion.
I just self-host Gogs, GitLab, Trac, cgit, etc. They are independent of each other, of course. :) Different teams, different needs. As far as my personal projects go, I just self-host cgit, and I accept "pull requests" through e-mail. It works.
It is an opinion I share but disagreeing with the inclusion of politics into tech makes people believe you have taken the opposite stance.
There is little nuance permitted in US politics and US politics is the only politics permitted in technology.
I blogged about it. It has cost me job opportunities.
I tend to not share my political views anywhere, especially not on Twitter. I do not even own a Twitter account! If I express my beliefs, it is under a pseudonym. Sometimes I even argue in favor of something with what I disagree only to learn more.
By all means, they can care about politics- but they cant force me to care about their politics and they should not be as reactionary as they are when I take my business elsewhere.
I am just a dude who likes computers. I don’t need to shoulder problems from half a world away on behalf of billion-dollar corporations.
could you elaborate?
a place that forces me to get involved in political arguments or where partisan politics influences business decisions or the company openly favors a particular party such that all employees are assumed to support that choice, is not a place where i want to work.
The parent explicitly said they disagree with GitHub's political views. I take this to mean they in fact have taken the opposite stance.
Don't know what they though that my involvement in open-source projects would correlate well to e-commerce CMS work (I've worked in e-commerce dev well before opening a Github account). But it's probably some weird "tie breaker" decision given that I am not local to LA.
Well, it does. It says he doesn't have a portfolio for some reason. Is it because he is incompetent and has nothing to show for? Perhaps not, but if the candidate makes it difficult for recruiters and interviewers to get an objective way to corroborate his claims regarding his level of expertise then just for the sake of avoiding wasting your time with yet another paper tiger... It would be better to cut him out of the shortlist for further interviews.
No, you do not have to have a "reason" for not having a public portfolio. Not having a public portfolio doesn't say anything at all about someone's competence.
>> if the candidate makes it difficult for recruiters and interviewers to get an objective way to corroborate his claims regarding his level of expertise
Public code is not the only way to assess skills, indeed as I mentioned elsewhere in this thread its actually a pretty bad way to assess skills. If the best tools you have for assessing competence is github then your recruiting process is lacking.
>> It would be better to cut him out of the shortlist for further interviews.
I can imagine employers with this attitude lamenting how hard it is to find good people.