Hacker News Reader

Comment by tstrimple | Hacker News Reader

I don't think there is anything wrong with preferring developers who like programming enough to choose to do it in their free time as well. Especially in a startup environment where a bad hire can be devastating.

View on HN

The article is discussing what is wrong with using "GitHub profile" as an indicator of "likes programming enough" - among other reasons, that underrepresented people tend to have less free time available, and that underrepresented people tend to have a less fun experience of working on public projects (getting dismissed, harassed, etc.).

We all use criteria as proxies to judge a specific part of someone's competencies or personality.

Is the competency we're proxying for that people "like" programming? Or is the competency that someone is "good at coding"?

I would much prefer someone who's good at the latter than the former. I could care very little whether someone enjoys coding in their free time, I need to know they are competent and work well on a team.

Not me. I've worked in "enterprisey" environments where people were just there to collect a paycheck. Sure, they could commit code that didn't break shit, but it was inelegant and made life worse in the long run.

Now that I'm doing the hiring (not something I ever wanted for myself, but we all have to grow up sometime)... I like the people I've hired so far, I would never subject them (or myself) to working with someone who didn't see coding as "more than just a job."

In my experience, there is a strong correlation between people who like programming and work on projects in their spare time, and their ability to contribute successfully in a programming job. As I've said in other comments, you need some method of filtering out job applicants. I find that people who do things to stand out (personal website, side projects, github account, etc) are worth looking at more than people who rely solely on a CV.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com