"Among 30 random people who applied for my marginal job opening [in 2005], no married people, women, or university graduates were observed logging in to complete the unusual programming test we set up for candidates".
When you write it out the way it actually happened, it doesn't sound so interesting. That this post dates back to 2005 is not the author's fault. And yet here we are in 2009 talking about gender politics and married people and whatever on Hacker News, based on what? Nothing.
Re:Hiring programmers (2005)
by RiderOfGiraffes on Tuesday July 14, 2009 @03:21PM
(#704401)
<shrug> As you wish. As someone who currently manages 8 programmers, and am always being approached to see if we have an opening, and am always concerned about the hiring process, I am always interested in such things. I thought people here on HN might also be.
I'm interested to hear your views, much as I might disagree with them. I haven't down-mud you, and I wish others wouldn't. I think your thoughts add value. They make me think again, even if I conclude that in my opinion you're wrong.
I'm amazed you think that someone making true observations they think are interesting is being borderline irresponsible. Quite specifically he says the sample is too small, quite specifically he says that "not having these attributes was no guarantee of success." Quite specifically he says that they saw no positive predictors.
What should he have done? Observed these things, noted that he was surprised by some, then not told anyone? That seems to me to be borderline irresponsible.
I see this post as an invitation to make a larger experiment, one with controls, and where the sample is large and chosen appropriately.