

Why are technical recruiters so clueless? - jswinghammer
http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2598-why-are-technical-recruiters-so-clueless

======
mikeryan
Shoot he should respond to this "I created the Ruby on Rails framework. My
base salary is $5,000,000 a year. Looking forward to relocating to SF"

~~~
tptacek
No, because he knows the recruiter will have no idea what that means. She's
just reading words off a page.

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
Reading? Don't you mean copying?

~~~
ghurlman
Hey, c'mon now... they also paste.

------
lsc
_Why are technical recruiters so clueless?_

because technical recruiters, contrary to popular belief, are not hired to get
the best candidates.

Technical recruiters (and agencies) are hired to give the middle manager
denyability if a hiring mistake is made. I mean, if you hire your brother's
friend and he turns out to be some kind of crack fiend who ebays your spare
parts bin for more drugs, well, you've got a fairly good chance of getting
fired in the fallout. Now, if a recruiter recommends the same guy and the same
thing happens, well, now you can push some of the blame off on the recruiter.
there's no question about nepotism, etc.. the professional recruiter
recommended the guy.

~~~
KoZeN
I can see your point but unfortunately that's absolute rubbish.

There is a ridiculously small number of people who pay silly money to
recruiters to cover nepotism but the reality is that employers hand over five
figure sums to recruiters because they don't want to trawl through hundreds of
CV's in the hope of finding the right candidate over the space of a few weeks.

Sit with me for an hour discussing a senior level role and I will have three
incredible CV's sitting on your desk within a week. If the right person for
the job is one of those three, great, now pay me ridiculous money, otherwise
it hasn't cost you a penny.

~~~
lsc
It is quite possible that I'm just sour grapeing the industry because I have
failed myself several times. my experience:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1761329>

In this case, I just don't understand why they'd not take the person when I
suggested them (I think they had reason to respect and trust my opinion; I had
been working for them for a while, giving good advice. In fact, all this was
in preparation for me leaving; after I had been at the new job for a year or
so they spent considerable effort and money getting me to come back.)

I was trying to get them to hire someone who worked for me for some time
(which is to say someone who's work habits and skills I knew well) to fill the
position I was leaving vacant.

The agency in question had a long history of sending us people for mid to
senior sysadmin positions who I wouldn't hire for $15/hr.

So yeah, I am missing something about how the industry works, and middle
management covering it's ass fits the symptoms perfectly.

Obviously there could be something else going on that I don't understand.

------
Tangurena
"Technical" recruiters don't understand technology. The ones I've met are only
capable of handling bingo sheets of buzzwords.

My take on the whole recruiter industry is that the parasitic field of
recruiters exists because of 2 factors:

1\. Mismanagers don't know how to hire people. Is someone skilled? They don't
know. Will someone make a good fit? They don't know. It is like Supreme Court
Justice Potter's remark "I'll know it when I see it."

2\. Companies don't like how references have devolved to "X worked here from Y
to Z and is/is not eligible for rehire." This makes paying the 20-40% of the
first year's salary for a new hire a cheap way to evade lawyers, courts and
previous employer's HR departments. In short, recruiters get hired by HR
departments to get around other HR departments (perhaps one should consider
getting rid of one's HR dept?).

------
spuz
I was actually hired in my current role by a competent technical recruiter.
He's not a technical person but he sure knows how to find good technical
people. His trick is to get good people to come to _him_ by setting up events,
conferences and pub meetups around interesting topics (e.g. the latest JVM
language or Agile development practices). Of course, 90% of the people who go
there aren't looking for jobs but I expect he does pretty well out of the 10%
that are.

I think this is actually the right way to go about recruitment. Don't spam
100s of people on the off chance they're currently unhappy and looking to
move. Just set up an environment which attracts the best people in the
industry but also allows them to consider new opportunities. Not only that but
as a recruiter you are immersed in the world you are recruiting for and cannot
help learn and understand more about it (e.g. this morning I got an email on
the list mentioning a possible talk about Jaskell - a language I hadn't even
heard of but apparently, my recruiter has :)).

------
netmau5
Funny timing on this story: I was contacted yesterday at work by a recruiter.
He called my cell phone and my typical response is to not answer calls that
are not pre-defined contacts at work. The guy then went to my LinkedIn
profile, found my company, went to the company website, and then called my
office. I gave him an earful about how unprofessional I thought it was for him
to be contacting me at my job to recruit for another position and then hung up
on him when he tried to backpedal saying he was just looking for referrals. In
my experience, recruiters are not only clueless but also rude and shady.

I have personally known a wonderful recruiter and despite my respect for her,
I have very little respect for the average recruiter. The profession itself
does provide value as it is truly difficult to find good people, but the low
signal to noise among recruiters themselves can just as easily make it more
difficult to find the right person.

------
swombat
I'm not entirely sure why DHH assumes that this email was not, in fact, sent
via "some shady Russians"...

------
eli
_If they’re just going to spam people from emails they find on tech sites, why
not just pay some shady Russians to do it?_

Based on some of the emails I've gotten, I'm pretty sure that's exactly what
some of them do.

It's easier and much cheaper in the short run to just spam everyone with a job
opportunity and sort through responses versus actually doing the legwork to
find qualified candidates.

Of course, in the long run it's going to make me skeptical of any future
opportunities they send my way, and it certainly isn't going to make me want
to hire them if I ever find myself on the other side of the table.

------
tocomment
I never understood why they stop communicating if an opportunity doesn't pan
out? Why wouldn't they be interested in cultivating a long term relationship?

That's what I think I would do if I were a recruiter. I'd keep in touch with
say 200 people I know are really good and keep placing them as they switched
jobs. I'm guessing at least 10 or 20 of those people would be switching jobs
every year.

~~~
run4yourlives
Because being good at your job would put you out of work. :-)

If you place people into positions that they really fit with, odds are they
would stay longer, ergo, less money for you.

What you would need to do is sell yourself as an agent that is constantly
evaluating new gigs for a monthly fee. I think that might actually work really
well for devs that consult as a primary business.

~~~
eru
How about negotiating a different pay-structure, that aligns interests better?

~~~
run4yourlives
Isn't that exactly what I suggested?

~~~
eru
In general, yes. Though I thought more about getting a low percentage of
income for as long as the job lasts, instead of a big percentage of the first
annual income after three months.

------
jbarham
My guess is that DHH is primarily annoyed that the spammy email started by
addressing him as "Dave".

~~~
dhh
That's just extra spice on top. I fucking hate it when people I don't know
assumes it okay to make up a nickname for me.

~~~
davidw
Really? I get called Dave, David, or even Davide (I live in Italy so even
David might come out as "Dah-veed") and I really don't care as long as the
person is nice and respectful and otherwise pleasant to communicate with
(annoying recruiters don't really count).

I mostly use it as a measure of how clued-in they are about me, but even some
of the people who have mistaken me for a Davide (not the statue,
unfortunately), have been very well-intentioned people with interesting things
to say.

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
I don't care about slight misspellings or mispronunciation, (I get it all the
time with the last name of "Reese"), by my biggest pet peeve is people
assuming that John is short for Jonathon, even if/after they see my named
spelled with the "h"...

~~~
warfangle
Point, some spell it Johnathan. I, myself, spell it Jonathan.

------
olegkikin
That's why me and my friends launched <http://recruiter-review.com>

(I hope you don't consider this spam)

~~~
ciupicri
Please replace the Facebook login with a more generic OpenId login.

~~~
TeHCrAzY
I don't have Facebook, and I don't use OpenId. What now?

~~~
squidsoup
Panic - apparently you don't exist.

------
chow
TL;DR: DHH is annoyed that there are people in the tech industry who have
never heard of him.

~~~
kscaldef
No, he's legitimately complaining about people spamming out recruitment emails
without doing any research on the people they are contacting. For example, my
resume on my personal website says "I am not interested in moving from
Portland. Really. Seriously." My LinkedIn profile says "I am happily located
in Portland, OR. Please don't bother me with job possibilities that require
moving somewhere else." And yet, I would say that only about 5% of the emails
I get from recruiters are for local or telecommute jobs. The other 95% are for
relocation to the Bay Area or Seattle.

~~~
clistctrl
to be fair, a telecommute job would not require you to relocate, so it seems
pretty legitimate ;)

~~~
kscaldef
You should re-read what I wrote more carefully. Telecommute was grouped
together with local jobs in the acceptable 5%.

------
brudgers
The barrier to entry in the recruiting industry is low, i.e. a cellphone, an
internet connection and some available time.

It beats trying to sell real-estate for those "in transition" because you can
do it in your pajamas or pretend to be a career coach.

They're so clueless because most recruiters just search the web for jobs you
could have found yourself, and then try to work their way into getting a cut.
Therefore a typical recruiter reduces a person's chance for a job.

There are some good one's out there. But they're few and far between. Because
they have done their research prior to contacting you, their emails will be
short, to the point, and designed to screen for deal breakers, "Would you be
interested in a job in St. Louis?"

~~~
lsc
>The barrier to entry in the recruiting industry is low, i.e. a cellphone, an
internet connection and some available time.

There is something more to it than that. I've tried to become a recruiter
several times, and I've gotten shot down every time I tried, even though I can
demonstrate a history of hiring good people.

~~~
brudgers
Shot down by whom?

There's nothing preventing someone from hanging a shingle as a recruiter.

That's what I was getting at.

Edit: Recruiting is one of those "make your own jobs" Ehrenreich describes in
_Bait and Switch_.

~~~
lsc
_Shot down by whom?_

the company I was attempting to recruit for.

I've got at least one example where I offered a person I knew was good to a
company that had hired me in the past. He was rejected without an interview.
Being as I couldn't help the guy, I recommended him to an agency that worked
with that company, and he got the job. Everyone seemed pretty happy with the
deal, the guy stayed on for several years and finally left because the agency
involved was incredibly sketchy.

Of course, I didn't get a commission out of the deal. I mean, I'm not
complaining too much; when I recommended the guy to the agency, I knew from
that point forward that I had zero chance of earning anything from the deal.
Maybe that's how it should be? I don't know.

My point is that recruiting goes way beyond just finding good people.
Honestly, I'm not sure exactly what the rest of the value you need to provide
is, but I do know that I can provide good people, and that simply is not
enough.

~~~
salemh
Strong outgoing sales like personality. This role is mostly a sales position
over the phone, with varying degree's of research for the best candidates. EG:
finding a Sr Director of Technology in the SEO space for a $10M firm in the
Valley; sourcing other firms with similar technical stacks; headhunting other
Directors; selling the company; selling the hiring manager on the candidate;
hopefully magic occurs.

But, many times its just X number of candidates results in X number of
interviews and X number of offers. Some companies are more interested in
volume, and some are more interested in placements (results) only.

Breakdown of different types of recruiters: <http://www.job-
hunt.org/recruit.shtml>

Examples of high-quality retained search firms:
<http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/10553203/c_10676328>

------
takrupp
Top recruiters work in the highest paying industries, which rarely includes
technology (except in the upper echelons). Most of these recruiters are from
large firms, filling contract or lower level hires that net the firm maybe
$10-20k and gets them personally a few hundred extra bones in their pockets.
Its the McDonalds end of recruiting.

On the other hand, there is a small (as mentioned above) 1-2% of recruiters
who work in really high paying sectors that really know their industries.
They're like the Outback Steakhouse of their profession. They still need to
work with a lot of candidates, but it pays for them to go to conferences, read
industry material and even (gasp) learn programming themselves (Thanks Zed!).

------
smiler
I guess technical recruiters will never be any good until you find ex software
developers to be technical recruiters - and I can't think you'd find many
software developers willing to do that.

I am convinced there are still many ways for recruiting to be fixed by
disruptive startups

~~~
KoZeN
_I am convinced there are still many ways for recruiting to be fixed by
disruptive startups_

I couldn't agree more. I've been actively trying to tackle this problem, so
far without success, for a while now.

~~~
ig1
I'm working on a developer recruitment based startup at the moment, if you
want to grab coffee sometime give me a shout.

I'm not in London at the moment but I should be shortly (i.e. as soon as I can
find somewhere in London to live !)

~~~
KoZeN
Sounds like a plan. One point on your site though:

 _Brand has huge influence when trying to hire the best, so unlike recruiters
we don't hide your brand._

There are two reasons why recruiters don't advertise company names:

1) They don't want the competition muscling in.

2) A lot of companies don't want their brand advertised as they don't want the
competition to know that they are hiring at certain levels and they also don't
want to be pestered by other agencies who spotted the advert and are trying to
pitch their services.

~~~
ig1
And the third reason: to stop the candidate going direct to the company.

But from a candidates viewpoint they don't really care what reason the
recruiter has for hiding the company name, it takes away valuable information
from them when looking at job ads.

There are always going to be some companies who prefer not to be named
(stealth hedge funds, etc.) but I think they're in a relatively small
minority.

I suspect for the most part avoiding letting the competition know what you're
hiring for is fairly pointless, as the first thing your recruiter is going to
do is to call the best potential candidates and pitch them the job. And as it
turns out the best potential candidates are often most likely to be working
for your competitors.

When I was working in investment banking and got a call for a recruiter hiring
for a rival trading desk I frequently pumped them for information which we
could use for our own advantage. I'm pretty sure everyone else does that as
well.

------
edw519
_Why are technical recruiters so clueless?_

Because they are a little less clueless than most HR departments.

 _Are there any recruiters working in technology who get it?_

Yes. The top 1 or 2%. The bell curve of competency for recruiters is a lot
steeper at the high end, so finding one who "gets it" is difficult. So when
you do, keep them. Whether you're hiring or looking, they can change your
life.

 _The problem with this kind of hackery is that it has breed an outright
animosity to recruiters in large parts of the tech world._

When you stop to think about it, this may not be such as bad thing for the top
1 or 2% of recruiters. Once the wheat is separated from the chaff, it becomes
more straight forward for a competent recruiter to do their thing and gain
your trust.

In this way, recruiters have a lot in common with real estate agents, car
salesmen, lawyers, and even programmers. The masses of mediocre ones give the
whole profession a bad name, but the best rise to the top and really do make a
difference.

~~~
KoZeN
I'm a technical recruiter and I agree with the majority of this post to be
honest.

My background: 2.1 in Software Development from a leading Uni in Ireland. 2
years experience as a web developer for a medium sized Irish software firm and
I've been in recruitment for just over 2 years now.

The amount of fellow recruiters I come across who believe java & javascript
are one and the same for example is ridiculous.

 _The masses of mediocre ones give the whole profession a bad name_

This is unequivocally my biggest hurdle, convincing candidates & clients alike
that I know my Ruby from my Perl.

Good article, I approve! ;)

~~~
swombat
How are you liking it? Don't you prefer to do development yourself? What's the
hardest thing about the job? Would you recommend it to other developers?

~~~
KoZeN
I love recruitment, I honestly do. Primarily because of the money I make!

I loved working as a developer but there was a distinct lack of social and
professional interaction that eventually led to me looking at other options.

It was satisfying completing a difficult project and seeing it implemented but
I get infinitely more satisfaction from finding someone their perfect job as
well as landing a juicy commission payment for the privilege of doing so!

Hardest part: The sales aspect. It is still a very sales orientated career and
it can be difficult to not come across as the 'cheesy salesman' and hammer
home the point that I am a developer by trade but a recruiter by choice.

I don't know if I would recommend it to other developers. It's quite hard to
get established in the industry and start earning enough money to realise the
potential of the career.

~~~
Timothee
No offense, but the fact that the money aspect is what you like the most puts
me off a bit... it feels too much like the stereotypical "sales guy".

However, it explains why I dealt with a couple of recruiters who touted their
PhD in their email signature. I couldn't really understand why someone with a
PhD would "end up" being a recruiter. But money can explain it I suppose.
(they were still bad though)

~~~
takrupp
The money is nice, and it is a "Sales" job, but their is some creativity to
it. You are trying to marry a candidate to a client. They are both moving
targets. Its a skill game, more than a "bang the phones" game that a normal
sales job is.

There are a number of quants and C++ developers who made the move to
recruiting, sometimes after talking to a recruiter and realizing that there is
money to be made (usually more than they are making). I related to this: I did
a lot of IT and web development work in my youth, and that always entailed
being someone's bitch and not getting recognized for the work I did (Only the
mess ups get noticed: Like being a goalie in soccer). In recruiting, you see
the angles, work your relationships and make money. Its a one person job
(mostly) and there is a lot of enjoyment in that aspect. At the end of the day
you say "I did X placements, billed Y amount. Thats what I did", which isn't
about the money as much as its about having a quantitative score that
demonstrates your productivity.

~~~
bphogan
This is exactly why I started doing training and writing, which led me to my
current gig at the Pragmatic Bookshelf - I get to work with smart people who
want my help. I get to see people succeed, and I get to share in the success
instead of handling the late night support calls when the app is down cos the
client's cruddy shared host went offline.

I'll always love developing, but I long ago learned that my greatest strength
is helping other people become better.

------
peteforde
I'm disappointed to see someone as smart as David casually leaning on a
stereotype like "shady Russians".

I'm confident that he wouldn't have said "sneaky Jews" or "naive Canadians" or
"cheap Mexicans".

~~~
VladRussian
have it ever crossed you mind that if someone as smart as David is casually
leaning on a stereotype than there are some reasons behind the stereotype?

~~~
danielnicollet
Vlad, Right or wrong, it's still a stereotype, and I'd appreciate that it be
kept off the air. Signed: Arrogant Frenchman ;-) Dan

~~~
VladRussian
i don't honestly understand what is wrong (to the extent what it is almost
considered a 10-letter word) about stereotypes usage. A stereotype is just a
result of analytical and/or statistical aggregation. In this particular case
he didn't stated what all Russians are shady. He stated that there is a [non-
empty, and we all know it is really far from empty] set of Russians that have
common trait of being shady and there is subset of them such that some email
spamming work can be outsourced to them. What is wrong with such stereotype
usage?

And is it just my bad luck with Russians (what are the odds?), that i do
prefer Moscow-Paris flights when majority of passengers are French than the
flights of Russian airlines with majority of passengers being Russians?

~~~
kunley
What's "wrong" with stereotypes is that the political correctness mindset
denies there's the truth underneath these stereotypes. But obviously is.

My country has an healthy measure against correctness. We have lots of
terrible jokes exploiting stereotypes off all nations. We still delightfully
tell jokes about Nazis (well we were the first they attacked during WWII and
also a most deserted country afterwards), though the war ended so long ago. We
have jokes on Russians (hundreds of years of conflicts with those people),
Jews (yeah even on how Germans killed them in out land), Americans, Muslims
and so on.

And you know what.. it turns out to be extremely healthy. The foreigners (esp
Americans!) are frightened on how terrible and rude these jokes are, but in
fact such jokes dissolve many tensions instead of accumulating them.

The trick is: we also laugh of ourselves. Intensively.

------
jbarham
The email that DHH got is essentially spam since he is obviously not looking
for a job.

I've gotten my previous two jobs via "technical recruiters". If you expect
them to hack on operating systems in their spare time you'll probably be
disappointed, but IMO they are useful as market makers and are highly
motivated to match you up w/ an employer that will be happy w/ you (since
there is typically a 3-month probation before they're paid, and it can lead to
repeat business). I wouldn't bash them for being technically ignorant since
it's not as if internal HR recruiters are known for their technical
proficiency either.

------
larsberg
True story: while managing a decently sized development org at MSFT, I used to
regularly get contacted by the technical recruiters for the contracting
agencies telling me I was oddly perfectly qualified to do some entry-level
work!

Of course, this may be a successful recruiting approach, as the hourly net pay
for the entry-level contractors frequently worked out to more than the salary
pay for mid-level folks, due to all of the overtime. No benefits, but if
you're in a situation with a spouse with a decent comp. package, it could
certainly be an alternative.

------
ThomPete
I have by coincidence been involved with recruitment lately primarily of
highly skilled UX, Design and technical people.

Although I am not a developer I do know my Perl from my Ruby, from my Haskel
and that there are two types of javabeans. One drinkable one non-drinkable.

The primary challenge is that the people that are good aren't looking for
work, in fact they probably never will have to as they transition naturally in
a personal growth curve within their own social network.

So if you need to find good people you have to have your ears open and know
where to look for them. This is the challenge but also interesting in more
than one way.

If you know how to find the right people for the right job, you will gain
insight into how to find the right customers for your product.

And that is a very interesting skill to get IMHO.

------
T_S_
The best way to tell a good recruiter from a clueless (normal) one is whether
they have an exclusive arrangement with the employer. This is as rare as good
recruiters are. It is more common in hiring for senior jobs in big companies.

------
microtherion
From a recruiter e-mail I received this week:

    
    
      The position is based in Bucharest but 
      extensive international travelling is required.
    

Umm… thanks, I guess.

------
bdr
Maybe there's an opportunity here to build a web-based recruiter reputation
system. The good recruiters would be happy to stand out from the bad.

~~~
riffer
_The good recruiters would be happy to stand out from the bad._

Only if you can provide some ex-ante assurance to the good ones that your
reputation system isn't going to be gamed by bad ones who focus on gaming
rather than being good recruiters.

~~~
bdr
Isn't that like saying "yeah, but it would have to work"? Seems like you
should assume I meant that. In your scenario, the good recruiters would not
stand out from the bad.

------
raghus
Speaking of career moves, this made it through GMail's spam detector this
morning:

 _Hello Raghu,

Based on your resume, we are pleased to offer you the position of Mail Order
Shipment Inspector( MOS Inspector) in our company. Your duties will include
receipt and registration of packages, submission of detailed reports to our
management and shipment of packages to end customers with postal labels we
will send you. Depending on the number of packages you process, the monthly
pay would be in the range of USD 1,500 - 2,500 Not sure if you are still
looking for a job but let us know if so, so that I could get back to you with
more details. Also, please add my address into your address book to prevent my
messages from filtering into your junk mail folder.

Thank you, Victoria Premo_

------
djhworld
Recruiters just mass mailshot everyone because they're hoping to get a bite.

I've had recruiters ring me in the past with jobs that have a real tenuous
connection with my skillset, yet they still think I'm suitable for the role.

The best one was when one rang me advertising for a £50k Senior Java Developer
position. "Great!" someone might think, but at the time I had only just
graduated from University and had 1 year of junior development experience
under my belt. I told her this and THEN she read my CV/resume and realised.

Recruiters these days are nothing more than CV/resume pushers, chances are for
every 100 or so they sent out, 1 or 2 will get an interview, 1 or 2 will get
the job and they land themselves a healthy commission from the employer.

It's a lucrative business

------
alexyim
This email sounds exactly like one that I got. It seriously is just spam.

------
omarish
Technical recruiters looks for different types than most of the audience on
HN. The tech recruiter looks people who can write decent code, but at the end
of the day, will be replaceable commodities in an organization.

As a tech recruiter, your job isn't to find the next DHH. It's to arbitrage
technical talent to fill positions. I don't think that they're motivated by
quality as much as they are by finding just the right _quantity_.

------
maxer
i was at a conference recently and had my phone on silent the whole day, I
have 8 missed calls and 2 emails in the space of 7 hours from a recruiter.
Really, if i didnt answer the first 4 times that day what made him think i
would answer the last 4. he was recruiting for a php contractor position

</end rant>

------
code_duck
Because the average person is clueless, often including myself, and there is
no reason or technical recruiters to be any different.

Anyhow, that's a pretty hilarious letter to send to DHH. I don't think it
speaks to the general situation with technical recruiters, however.

------
araneae
Technical recruiters may be clueless, but this is hardly evidence. This is
spam. I got a similar e-mail today saying they had viewed my "portfolio." Well
I'm not sure how they did that since I don't have any work under the e-mail
address they sent it to.

------
cabalamat
The consensus here is that recruitment agencies are clueless. So why hasn't
the internet disintermediated them? This would be a good startup idea for
someone.

~~~
conjectures
Thinking about some disintermediations. On the supply side with consumer goods
you have replicable stock (buy in more t-shirts/potatos). Presumably this is
not how jobs work. You need someone to go around harvesting individual
opportunities. Like collecting truffles as opposed to growing potatos.

With other unique items such as houses / ebay on the demand side you have
various market entry costs: can the 'buyer' physically come over and see the
house / can you get their paypal details? With jobs it's very easy (cheap) to
apply, while for the employer it is costly to assess applications - making the
pre-screening service offered by recruiters attractive.

Plus to disintermediate you'd need employers to directly deal with more of the
HR process. That's open to them already, I suspect it's just not something
people relish. Like you could save money washing your car but often it's just
seen as a pain to be avoided.

Perhaps there are other improvements besides disintermediation: e.g. jobs
sites with recruiter reputation/feedback. Seems pretty obvious but I actually
haven't seen it around much. Can imagine there would be some bias (everyone
who didn't get a post is peeved, plus some that did).

------
drtse4
The main problem here is that Kelly should start using some other tools/source
of information instead relying only on "grep" for her job.

~~~
rcfox
It's cute that you think she uses grep.

~~~
drtse4
Originally i was going to write something sarcastic involving grep and instead
i wrote that :D

EDIT: Hey, seriously, that was an attempt at humor...

------
kingkawn
Because you sit opposite them in an institutional process, and you're at their
mercy.

------
jwcacces
Because if they knew what they were doing, they'd be doing it.

------
ZachPruckowski
There's like a one-in-tens-of-millions chance of that working. But it takes 5
seconds to send the email, and I imagine "I recruited DHH" is worth millions.
So you quickly wind up with math suggesting that sending that email was
worthwhile in terms of $/hour.

~~~
snowmaker
From the email, it's obvious that the recruiter had no idea who DHH was and
was just hitting a list of "ruby programmers".

