[anticsapp]

I'd much rather have a LinkedIn or a GitHub, I can't stand personal portfolio sites with a lot of frippery and it's unclear what they actually have accomplished.

He needs to put line items into his LinkedIn, that's for sure. But he was probably dodging recruiterspam.

[wegs]

It's not an either-or. Hiring, you want as many independent data points as you can. An ideal candidate would have:

1) A strong resume / linkedin. Worked on projects which were successful. Worked for companies with rigorous recruiting processes. Didn't job hop randomly.

2) Good references from people I trust. In an ideal case, a personal referal.

3) A nice portfolio. I can see artifacts on github, on their web site, and through publications in academic journals.

4) A strong undergraduate school. Passed undergraduate recruiting.

5) A strong interview

6) A history of interest in what we do.

I don't think I've ever met an ideal candidate, but as an applicant, you want to give as many strong signals on all of those fronts as you can.

If all he had was an on-line portfolio, I probably wouldn't hire either.

[anticsapp]

Yes, that's true. Avoid an either/or situation. John Cage said that long ago.

[charwalker]

Those sites also force some order or format across all projects/profiles so it is easier to dig in and find specific things if needed.