Hacker News Reader

Comment by kw_ | Hacker News Reader

Looking at Stackoverflow Careers from a hiring perspective, I don't really understand the point.

If suddenly 20% of my candidates have a CV that includes some "reputation" score, and other information from a programming website, what am I to do with that?

Does it mean they spend time on stackoverflow instead of working? Does it mean they're a genius who knows all? Does it mean they simply ask and answer a lot of simple questions, but are useless on complex matters? Do I really want to try to figure that out?

In the end, I want to do apples to apples comparisons, and I'm not sure how SO Careers fits in there.

Are there suggested Best Practices for how to integrate SO Careers into a candidate search? Perhaps somebody can enlighten me if I'm missing something, but I don't get it.

View on HN

The score itself doesn't prove anything, but its inclusion on the CV is meant to encourage employers to view the account and see what sort of questions and answers the candidate is posting on the site. It won't let you compare apples to apples, but it's not meant to. It's meant to provide another dimension to assess the candidate, in addition to their work experience, personal projects, GPA, etc. As such, it's not designed to fit in the same slot that Monster.com, Dice, etc fill - and to trying to treat it as such removes a lot of the unique benefit of the site for employers.

> encourage employers to view the account and see what sort of questions and answers the candidate is posting on the site

If a candidate feels that there is a very good, publicly available demonstration of their knowledge (be it a project they're involved in, some open-source software, or participation in a technical forum or mailing list), they already have the ability to simply point that out to me in their cover letter, or other communications.

> It's meant to provide another dimension to assess the candidate

This is precisely the problem. It creates an additional dimension, but one that exists only for a subset of candidates and isn't easy to evaluate fairly. That seems likely to create an imbalanced hiring process.

Why should I pay for that? (or implicitly ask the candidate to pay to give it to me?)

Especially the later question especially, [why should I] "ask the candidate to pay to give it to me?", hangs in the air.

Asking a candidate to effectively pay money to apply isn't "the way to their heart". It isn't necessarily legal or ethical either. Joel has described what high demand there is for the "great programmers". Is it plausible that these same great programmers are going to be paying money to be found?

I like Stackoverflow. I spent a month getting 1000+K reps and then realized I should stop and do some work.

I like the idea of integrated SO to job search. It's just that direction that this integration has been problematic, indeed it could plausibly called evil.

Every candidate has different additional dimensions. People aren't interchangeable cogs.

Also, life isn't fair. I don't see what fairness has to do with anything.

I don't see what fairness has to do with anything.

Uh, I wouldn't want to work for a company which showed blatant unfairness in its hiring. Similarly, most worthwhile companies don't want to show such unfairness. The companies that are unfair in hiring probably would be unfair in their treatment of employees once they get hired, etc..

It's an extra bit of information that you wont get from interviewing someone. A lot of people interview well and are good at talking, but can't program worth a damn and they will waste lots of your time and money. I've seen this happen a lot.

The fact that someone spends time on the website answering questions shows they are passionate about programming and might be helpful people. Generally these are considered good traits.

It would be worthwhile to spend some time figuring this stuff out because it help you make a better choice. Good luck!

If you have a candidate with a good CV and he's given you his stackoverflow account name, then it should take you about 5 minutes to get a good idea of how much time he spends on the site, what kind of questions he asks/answers and how well those questions are asked and answered. What you want to do with information is course totally up to you, but I fail to see why having that information is in any way a bad thing.

I agree that a raw number means very little, but the info gleaned from looking up their stackoverflow account can tell you quite a bit.

Stackoverflow Careers is based on the premise that it's worth $5,000/yr to me, plus $99/yr/candidate for the candidate, to share that information.

Do you really see that much value, versus simply asking all candidates 'Are there any publicly accessible technical forums or mailing lists that you participate on a regular basis? If so, are you willing to share your username?'

I prefer the latter, because it's a question I can ask all candidates, and it doesn't cost me $5,000 to ask. Nor does it cost you $99 to answer.

I guess it's a perspective thing. To me it seems more like you're paying $5000 to get access to CVs by programmers who are dedicated enough to the whole job hunting process and secure enough in their ability that they're willing to pay $100 just to list their CVs. The stack overflow score seems fairly incidental to the whole process.

I think that the candidates who are most secure in their ability won't think that they need to pay $100 to get their CVs seen by good companies.

Again, I'm simply not buying the argument.

The reality is that I'd never just use StackOverflow to find candidates, so these are people who have other ways to find out about the positions, and apply.

I'd rather see the candidate spend the money on an ACM membership (or similar professional development) than spend it simply trying to reach me.

That said, I think I now have a pretty good idea of the value proposition as it might exist for other employers, but it seems clear that the equation doesn't balance for me. Thanks for clarifying your argument, I appreciate it.

I bought ACM membership. They never sent me the monthly CACM on time (8 months before receiving 6 issues in a box(!!!) in the mail, then 1 more 3 months later, still missing 5), and they sold my address and now I receive junk mail advertising academic books.

Joining ACM: just a plain bad idea. Only value is older papers not available ungated on citeseer or elsewhere.

It would be interesting to see what sort of questions the candidate has asked and what sort of answers he/she has given. Just how it's interesting to see some code samples from a previous project.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com