Joking cynicism aside, I think it was well done. I read the post to the end even though they gave the answer up front (good practice despite what’s”growth hackers” will tell you) and their mentions of the company seem authentic (i.e. they don’t tell you what they do, just that it was his main focus and made some legitimizing progress).
The takeaway being that Google should publicize its events more if they want more than a single digit number of submissions.
Ultimately, these events are entered either for the money or for the fame - the submitter finding a way to get a bit of both. Since Google didn't give out a large amount, they could rely mainly on fame, and that requires more than a post in a single reddit community (and a post removed by the moderators!).
Umm, yeah. But if I found this while doing background research on a job candidate I'd have to think twice about if this guy was really someone I wanted on my team... be careful what you brag about cheating on, lest you let people see the real you.
The use of cheating here is pretty tongue-in-cheek. I'd say the thought process exhibited in this is the exact kind of person you want to hire. Somebody who keeps their old work organized in such a way they can leverage it rather than start from scratch over and over again is hugely useful.
Not sure I would consider this cheating. At most if I was reviewing a resume from the person I'd think "coder reused old code, built on it to fulfill a new set of requirement. okay"
Talk about not wanting to hire someone: this person used the word playfully, not in the literal negative doing-something-wrong sense: but you're actually saying you ::like:: cheating in some of your staff as long as it makes you money
I wouldn't want that comment associated with my name.
Not to mention the endless amount of false expectations and customer complaints that causes, wasting engineers or devs & post-sales support staff endless hours dealing with the fallout. And nothing good happens to a company's culture when cheating in one area is fully embraced.
Hah, yeah. I've certainly had to explain why a seemingly simple request would take a while. And I have also looked like a genius more than once when I whipped out something I'd developed years ago that took me a month, tweaked some parameters and other simple changes, and had it a few hours later.
Unfortunately, the more of the later you have, the more people seem to get frustrated at the former.
It seems there is nothing in the rules that the submission must be your work. Since the Buzzword Bingo was under an Open Source license, anyone could simply submit it...