[jeffrallen]

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.

[blacktriangle]

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.

[ineedasername]

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"

[jeffrallen]

He called it cheating, not me.

I'd call it more taking advantage of the situation (he did too), which I like in my sales colleagues, and less in my engineering colleagues.

I'd hire him for sales.

[ineedasername]

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.

[tgsovlerkhgsel]

What cheating?

All he did was a really low-effort submission.

[jeffrallen]

Low effort submissions are what wasted most of my time code reviewing at one job...

[programbreeding]

Or it shows that he's open and honest. And that's definitely someone I would want on my team.