Talk:About Testing
Update
I recently stumbled into a tech-out for a cushy corporate job so doing an update. I'm a general contractor and sets of trick questions for a specific lang or set of packages are likely to trip me up if it's a reasonably good attempt to do so. I try to stay away from work where that's the mentality and I think more and more people are taking a bigger picture/higher level approach but I would have proceeded with tech out by hr proxy anyway because it was a large cap entity. Adding this blurb in case I stumble into another, so I can inform and refer with brevity. Root 12:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
untitled
I aim to bring justice to workers and high quality and value to consumers.
I do my best but I cannot guarantee a friction free ascent to this situation.
The Clueful!
After some recent bad experiences (see below) am beginning to get back into the good stuff :) A preliminary talk with a potential partner last night while that party perused the Resume Page and noticed the Testing Rant link caused them to comment that they test employees but not contractors. Experience tells me not to expect that generally as some hiring contractors will want to test and some hiring on a W2 basis won't.
A particularly pathetic case (3 Meadow 4704)
Going forward, I accept sponsitility if I bump my head on this shit. Yesterday it happened twice. The first was the lesser case, what looked like a decent gig. I had forewarned by sending a link to the article but they didnt' get it. That was my fault because I should have made clearer when they told me there was a technical interview. I guess I'm still laboring under the apprehension that I can have tech interviews such as I've had as recently as about 18 months ago that are the good kind I describe in the article¹. This was the sad one because I think I could have worked well with this entity in spite of their literal 20 questions.
The other was the one linked in the article. The mistake there was that after the person setup the phone I/V I went to thier site and saw that they were the Slavers From Hell and expressed my misgiving in a maybe 200 word note that should have been a single sentence cancelling the I/V. The individual apparently took it personally and called me with the apparent intent of "showing me up". In particular he asked "what is a thread"? Having worked with threading since it was introduced in late 80s in OS/2 I responded broad and deep. The statement that a thread is essentially a process must have totally flipped this person. Of course a process is usually associated with the OS job construct but the truth is that every variant of a sequence of instructions executed by a computer (or anything else for that matter) is in fact a process. Threads, fibers, tasks, jobs are all in essence processes. I gave other details based on an experience beyond this persons comprehension including reference to the B machines but the real mistake here was even speaking to this individual after having sent the note.
As if another ground were needed this last showed how at this point in my career my thinking is so completely maladapted for this sort of thing, I don't even think in a manner that can allow me to succeed in these small minded little torts.
¹ In these success cases, very simply, what happens is there is a enterpreneur with or without a technical background who is capable of making independent judgements. There often is also a heightened need for someone fitting my profile.
About References
This needs to be moved again, leaving it here till I decide where Root 13:32, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
A related¹ problem is the checking of references. If a free worker providing you services at reduced cost but serving many clients like yourself were to have her references checked constantly this would not work as the references would quickly become unresponsive.
This will be eliminated for any workers in the WIK-CSO Public Job Shop you may contract with as we vouch for them as qualified and indeed, if you contract under our framework, guaranteed workers. Later we may offer actual development insurance.
¹ in the sense of being a superstructure manifestation of the same base condition.
