General SE hiring comment: One thing I realized, for most IT/SE jobs, the more accurately you describe your current stack in the requirements (or maybe the person you are replacing), the smaller your candidate pool is. You might even find that your candidate pool is exactly the people you are already working with.
Which makes it problematic when we make HR people do the initial screening. They would filter out a lot of good candidates just because they used Python instead of Java, or had been working on a C++ project one year less than the person leaving the team.
Could it be then that this is a communication problem between the Engineering team and the HRD? After all, the Eng'g team writes the requirements for the job post, HRD just checks it and makes it look attractive.
(Though honestly, I don't think this general comment applies to the job post in Carmack's tweet. Honestly I can't fault the job post for the way it was worded. I say the higher you are in an SE-org chain, the less this is a problem.)
Which makes it problematic when we make HR people do the initial screening. They would filter out a lot of good candidates just because they used Python instead of Java, or had been working on a C++ project one year less than the person leaving the team.
Could it be then that this is a communication problem between the Engineering team and the HRD? After all, the Eng'g team writes the requirements for the job post, HRD just checks it and makes it look attractive.
(Though honestly, I don't think this general comment applies to the job post in Carmack's tweet. Honestly I can't fault the job post for the way it was worded. I say the higher you are in an SE-org chain, the less this is a problem.)