[dazzeloid]

he's a really talented engineer, crushed our interviews. the funny thing was that he actually had multiple companies on his linkedin at the same time, including ours. we just thought they must have been internships or something and he never updated them (he felt a bit chaotic). but then it turned out he was working at all of them simultaneously.

worked for us for almost a year and did a solid job (we also let him go when we discovered the multiple jobs)

[nyarlathotep_]

> he's a really talented engineer, crushed our interviews.

Think it says a lot about this industry if "really talented 'engineer'" means passing loads of gamified interviews and not delivering things on time.

[StackRanker3000]

But the person you’re responding to said he did a solid job for almost a year.

[nickip]

How was he talented? All the stories are the same. "Talented" etc. But then it leads to he never did any work. How can you assess his talent?

[icedchai]

Perhaps he's talented at interviewing? Turns out this is the only skill you really need...

[StackRanker3000]

> worked for us for almost a year and did a solid job

[FootballBat]

All I hear is "really good at interviewing."

[thepasswordis]

The people assessing his talent are falling for the same delusion as the people conducting the interview.

[chanux]

https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/pol/fraud/resistance.html

[dazzeloid]

mid-level output, clearly had more capability than his output suggested from his ideas and some particularly strong contributions

[robswc]

Did he just lie and say he wasn't working at those places? Or did the question never come up?

When I used to interview I always had to check a box that said I wasn't currently employed, or they would ask at some point.

[dazzeloid]

funny thing was he had other places on his linkedin under "active employment" but we never really dug into it (until we learned he was full-time there) because he just seemed like the kind of person who wouldn't keep his LinkedIn up to date.

[the_real_cher]

Why would you let him go if he was doing a solid job?

[Aurornis]

When we had an OE person they could do good work if you gave them a lot of time, but getting them to communicate and be present with the team was hell. You had to always be tracking them down, getting them to respond, and working any meetings (which we had few of) into some narrow time slot where they were available.

It also drags everyone else down. The team figures out what's going on. They get tired of adjusting their communication around the one person who's always distracted and doing something else.

Basically, it turns into a lot of work for everyone else to get work out of the OE person. Like they can do good work, but they're going to make everyone else work hard to extract it from them because they're busy juggling multiple jobs.

All of the Soham stories I've read today have been the same: Good work when he was working, but he was caught because he wasn't working much.

[avmich]

Yeah, this looks like a cargo culting. Don't need work, need the guy to belong only to them...

[deepsun]

Sometimes it's NDA. Depends on what company does, but it's hard to imagine a product that does not compete with e.g. Google.

[dazzeloid]

trust. he was not forthcoming when confronted with the "this other company says you are full-time and just went to their offsite - is that true?"

[pwthornton]

It seems to me a really talented engineer would deliver more than solid work, no?

[mock-possum]

Why bother, when you get the paid the same regardless?

I don’t know the guy, but I feel like a lot of people are missing this angle - just because you’re technically capable, doesn’t mean you’re actually motivated or that you actually bother to deliver. You can also be lazy and just collect your check.