<p><pre><code> class Applicant < ActiveEngineer
require 'mad_skills'
</code></pre>
is an odd way to express it, because it doesn't actually say that Applicant has MadSkills. Presumably they mean:<p><pre><code> require 'mad_skills'
class Applicant < ActiveEngineer
include MadSkills</code></pre>
There's a substitution cipher at the end. Spoiler alert:<p>zllh://ooo.kzghallgew.uge/yggvbgt<p><a href="http://www.shopittome.com/goodjob" rel="nofollow">http://www.shopittome.com/goodjob</a>
I wonder if it would be a good idea to actually include <i>real</i> code in a job description, such as few choice code snippets from the company's source code.
Here's what a start-up ad for a programmers should look like:<p>* mycomapny.com [link to google maps]<p>* tech skill required: x, y, z<p>* [full-time || contract] && [local || remote]<p>* growth or biz model [link to mycompany.com/biz_model]<p>* investment [link to mycompany.com/investment]<p>* salary range $x to $y depending on experience<p>* benefits - health care, etc [link to mystartup.com/employee/benefits]<p>* employee rules [link to meycompany.com/employee/handbook]<p>* stock options [link to mycompany/com/employee/options]<p>If you want more high quality applicants, provide these details up front...Transparency Rules!!!<p>Skip the multi-paragraph fluff. You don't want to read it in the resumes, and job searchers don't want to read through it the job ads. Also, skip the puzzles. Puzzles limit your pipeline to those that have loads of time on their hands to solve your captcha. Do you want an applicant that has loads of time on their hands or the applicant that has the skills and right attitude?
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the bugs caused by unforeseen interaction of a) turning &lt; and &gt; into HTML entities and then b) stuffing them in a pre tag.
i used math notations <for intro> when i applied to grad school<p>something like ... there exist <my-name> such that bla <insert math mumbo-jumbo describing me as a unique subset of engineers><p>result? i got in and studied there
why don't the boolean methods have ?s in the names?<p>why did they put an english description too? either the ruby one is good or it isn't. make up your minds.