Bonogongo

I agree on that one.

You can do what you like, but if you swear at me and call me f* I'll not hire you.

It sounds like you have done this in the past, and it is blackmail.

And I understand that you don't want to see yourself as a blackmailer.

"I'm more worth than that" and leaving is standing up.

"Give me more money or I leave" is blackmail.

"Regarding your Wikipedia quote, leaving a job in which you are abused and underpaid is not at all unjustified."

Leaving is not the blackmail part, threatening to leave is the blackmail part.

@nilkin "You give me more money or I leave." vs. Just walking away from the negotiation. From my experience if you give in to "You give me more money or I leave" 6 months down the road it will be another "You give me more money or I leave" and then another.

Wikipedia: "Blackmail is an act [..] involving unjustified threats to make [..] cause loss to another unless a demand is met."

Hiring is a filtering game. With 100 candidates, first thing you do is filter out 80, I wish more candidates would understand this.

He blackmailed his boss, used f* f* f* in a conversation with him and you think "hink he's shown himself to have good character here."? Holy Batman.

From my point as a hiring manager for quite some time, I can only second "danger, high risk, unprofessional, possibly unstable individual who does not know how to behave in a business setting.

As a manager if someone tries to blackmail me with leaving, I usually say "Then leave". Never let people blackmail you.

Would I hire someone who swears and uses f* in a conversation with his boss? No.

Would I hire someone who creates a blog to make his boss look bad? No.

All of this with 4 kids I surely would not trust on you any responsibibility acting so irresponsible.

So everyone here who wants to hire this guy, a have nice time.

My advice: Try to understand why your boss only wanted you give $45k and work on yourself.

The wording "liberated" is a nice frame.

See "George Lakoff: Don't Think of an Elephant"

" Divide that over 18 machines, too!"

Yes therefor I'd said DB writes, which is the first step stone where you need to think a little in scaling.

2M req/day = 2000000/24/60/60 = 23 req/s average. With a assumed peak of 10x of avg. this is around 230 req/s.

Hmm. Not something I'd use the word 'scaling' for, even if there is a 1:1 write to DB ratio. With 1000 writes/sec to a DB it gets interesting.

Fellow poor soul, over the last 10 years whenever a server has high load I've got angry about the fact that load avg is not actionable, and exactly that "or even find out if it's because of IO or network"