Manager: That last dev you hired is working out well. Where did you get him from?

Dev: *Looking at new hire’s resume which only contains a single bootcamp and nothing else*

Dev: He’s a rescue.

Tagged with garbage collection. Quite harsh 😦

@Benutzername Looking at resumes is most of the time a very painful process....

Some of them are not even usable as toilet paper.

@IntrusionCM well, all resumes will probably clog the toilet. Unless written on toilet paper.

@electrineer yeah. Because only the toilet paper was blessed by the golgothan... not the office paper, which underwent an army drillcamp.

*rolls eyes*

Taking things a bit too serious, maybe?

Now I want to print my resumes on toilet paper and send to people. Plenty of sheets to shit with.

@IntrusionCM would you kindly print your assumption that my comment was serious on a toilet paper and wipe your ass with it

@IntrusionCM My experience has been the opposite. Someone with senior engineer at a reasonably respectable company, 5 years c++, comes in and can't do basic shit like write a function with a for loop. fml.

@atheist I’m just about used to reading about these so called seniors who literally can’t code, sadly. I don’t know how they stick around for 5 plus years, but they do

@TeachMeCode typical supply demand issue

@electrineer wow
.. this comment will be rent free in my head

@atheist I can only assume my comment was completely misunderstood.

When I'm talking about resumes, I mean the vita / application for a job.

And yes, most of the time reading them was painful experience.

We had applications sent in on Diddl paper (look it up on google), graph paper, blotting paper...

Office paper was luckily 90 % plus, still you notice it immediately when sorting out first round and ask yourself: What is wrong with you guys...

Actual application: most of the time, people overstress the patience of the reader. This reminded me of the comment of the rant here....

It's okay when you write down your job experience and maybe one or two hobbies... But sometimes we had an actual report on all activities the person did...

Last but not least: Bootcamps and certificates. It sounds like a win - except that the verification that the certificate is actually valid is painful. And by valid I mean that the company exists and to find out what was actually tested.

I started at some point to just ignore all bootcamp stuff... I'm not a fan of people learning everything by heart and not being able to apply it practical.

Doesn't mean I filtered them out, I just ignored them.

They only got filtered when the certificates were obviously faked.

So yes, I'd always choose an applicant with only one bootcamp certificate in my interviews - they're still "mendable".