You don't list it as a requirement; list it as something that would be nice to have.
If it's labeled a "requirement", yea, they were inviting dishonesty. No one should bother to apply since they don't qualify instantly.
If you're a qualified dev, you'd more likely conclude that it's a mistake on the part of whoever wrote the listing. I've seen skills listed like "Microsoft UML" or "Python, PHD, Nodes", so wouldn't think much of seeing "MOVA".
Eh... maybe, but there are obscure languages/platforms that don't search well.
[0] - https://conan.io/
I never assume the "requirements" are actually hard requirements to an application, and I encourage others in the job market to do the same.
Sure, if you miss 3 out of the 5 requirements listed you might pass on that application. But if you've got 4 out of the 5 requirements, and think you could accomplish the job as described, you should still strongly consider sending in an application. Don't lie on your CV that you submit, but you can still submit your CV.
You never know which requirements are actually hard requirements for the org, and which were just listed that way on the job listing.
The advice is still good; the requirements are really more of "strong desire" than actual requirements, and if you look at the typical requirements listing, its' unlikely that they will find enough people at the salary they offer to fit all of them anyways.
They had an opportunity to evaluate your resume or CV before inviting you in for an interview. If it was a hard requirement for them, they shouldn't have invited you in for an interview. The only time you're really wasting is the time of the person who is screening resumes.
> Yes, this has happened to me. On the up side I now have a list of a few companies I know I won't work for unless I'm desperate.
I'm sorry that happened to you! What a terrible experience. It's definitely good to keep that list of places you know you should avoid.
"Did you work with <technology in requirements> at company Y?"
"No, I worked with <technologies listed on resume>"
"Then where did you work with <technology in requirements>?"
"I haven't"
Cue rant about wasting everybody's time...
IMO that’s fair game for monkey business.
It's still lying.
EDIT: If it was listed as "Skills you shouldn't have", it would likely (sadly?) still be effective, without screwing with job applicants.
i was naive that time, but still angers me.
The how would know it doesn't exist is what separates the chaff from the wheat.