Re: Testing job applicants

[Pete Fenelon <pete@fenelon.com>]

In alt.folklore.computers Jeff Kenton <jkenton@world.std.com> wrote:
> To me, it's far worse to have someone who "loves to program" and thinks
> s/he's great at it, but isn't.  I'd rather have sullen competence than
> mindless enthusiasm.

Two kinds of "amateurism", one good, one dangerous.

I like the sort of "amateurism" that leads to people keeping old
machines alive, writing good freeware, doing interesting things
after-hours, thinking about new approaches... generally being
creative and keeping mentally active.

I despise the sort of "amateurism" that means no attention to any
part of the development process other than coding when at work, that
means ignoring the "dull bits" like requirements, spec, testing, 
documentation...

Knowing precisely what sort of "enthusiasm" a candidate has is a key
thing...

pete
-- 
pete@fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" (HMHB)