Nigel Rantor wiggly at
Wed May 9 15:41:17 BST 2007

Simon Burr wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 02:56:32PM +0100, Nigel Rantor wrote:
> [Technical qualifications]
>> Perhaps wrongly, I think they're meaningless.
> Whilst some technical qualifications aren't that useful, there are some which
> have some weight - eg the Cisco ones tend to be quite reasonable and most
> require lab work. AFAIR they also lapse after two years which is a nice
> feature - partly for Cisco's bottom line - but also because it means that if
> someone has a cert and they've kept it up to date you'd hope that they'd still
> know what they were doing.
> Where I work is going through the joys of trying to find people and even
> when a CV looks excellent, some candidates don't appear to actually have that
> much in depth knowledge when it really comes down to it. A colleague usually
> deals with the perl questions; its scary the number of people who don't know
> what context is, or the difference between local() or my().

So, we tag team interviews, one of my colleagues questions is basically 
a stack vs heap questino to figure out if they understand where stuff goes.

I thought this was far too simple...until we found a few people who just 
looked confused or got it plain wrong.


More information about the mailing list