Funny interview answers
-
You work with computers and do not recognise a perfectly acceptable answer? Shame on you.
Q: Would you like tea or coffee?
A: Yes
Is also perfectly cromulent.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
OK, I'm at a loss again:
Dalek Dave wrote:
cromulent
Why can't you guys just use words that are in the dictionary? ;P
It's a Simpsons (TV cartoon) word that is making it's way into the American language. It means fine or appropriate.
-
It's a Simpsons (TV cartoon) word that is making it's way into the American language. It means fine or appropriate.
-
Like I said, it was used in The Simpsons and has made its way into culture.
-
Cromulent[^] as defined by the Urban dictionary. References an inherent Simpsons reference[^] (item 3).
Sarchasm : The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
-
So, my lead was correcting these written test papers and he burst out in laughter suddenly. I went there to see what was it about and found this answer written by a candidate:
Q: Can you identify and define the C++ casting operators?
A: yes.:laugh: :laugh: Yes?! I also reckon a telephonic interview in which a candidate defined function overloading as "stuffing in too much of code in any given function". I muted the phone and laughed like mad before telling him I'm done with the call. :laugh: Have you ever been given such funny answers by any candidates? :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
It's the question that is wrong, not the answer: his answer was perfect. The question should have been: Q: Identify and define the C++ casting operators. If you can't even pose a question correctly how do you expect to be able to carry out a fair and balanced interview?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
OK, I'm at a loss again:
Dalek Dave wrote:
cromulent
Why can't you guys just use words that are in the dictionary? ;P
Ook. Ook. Ook ook.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
So, my lead was correcting these written test papers and he burst out in laughter suddenly. I went there to see what was it about and found this answer written by a candidate:
Q: Can you identify and define the C++ casting operators?
A: yes.:laugh: :laugh: Yes?! I also reckon a telephonic interview in which a candidate defined function overloading as "stuffing in too much of code in any given function". I muted the phone and laughed like mad before telling him I'm done with the call. :laugh: Have you ever been given such funny answers by any candidates? :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
I have to say it is a valid answer, a bit conservative, but still valid. (and it is hard to agree with digital man...) :)
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
It's the question that is wrong, not the answer: his answer was perfect. The question should have been: Q: Identify and define the C++ casting operators. If you can't even pose a question correctly how do you expect to be able to carry out a fair and balanced interview?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
You said it. :laugh: 5 from me
Arun Jacob My Technical Blog : Code.NET
-
It's the question that is wrong, not the answer: his answer was perfect. The question should have been: Q: Identify and define the C++ casting operators. If you can't even pose a question correctly how do you expect to be able to carry out a fair and balanced interview?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
Well, I do agree it was a "valid" answer, but no marks were given. The guy anyways plonked the exam with several wrong answers and bad code, but the point was that I enjoyed his sense of humour and I was merely asking if people have had similar experiences. Instead of which, you were trying to assess the fairness and balance of our interview process. Hot air. :rolleyes: But thanks for responding - it was humorous anyways. :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
-
I have to say it is a valid answer, a bit conservative, but still valid. (and it is hard to agree with digital man...) :)
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]CPallini wrote:
(and it is hard to agree with digital man...)
Indeed. :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
-
You work with computers and do not recognise a perfectly acceptable answer? Shame on you.
Q: Would you like tea or coffee?
A: Yes
Is also perfectly cromulent.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Or stick with Harry Worth:
Q: Would you like your coffee black?
A: As black as you like, as long as you leave room for the milk!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
So, my lead was correcting these written test papers and he burst out in laughter suddenly. I went there to see what was it about and found this answer written by a candidate:
Q: Can you identify and define the C++ casting operators?
A: yes.:laugh: :laugh: Yes?! I also reckon a telephonic interview in which a candidate defined function overloading as "stuffing in too much of code in any given function". I muted the phone and laughed like mad before telling him I'm done with the call. :laugh: Have you ever been given such funny answers by any candidates? :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
-
So, my lead was correcting these written test papers and he burst out in laughter suddenly. I went there to see what was it about and found this answer written by a candidate:
Q: Can you identify and define the C++ casting operators?
A: yes.:laugh: :laugh: Yes?! I also reckon a telephonic interview in which a candidate defined function overloading as "stuffing in too much of code in any given function". I muted the phone and laughed like mad before telling him I'm done with the call. :laugh: Have you ever been given such funny answers by any candidates? :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
It's also the correct answer to "Do you have the time?"
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Q: How do you handle change?
A: I deal with it every day, unless I'm out of clean underwear.WWW, WCF, WWF, WPF, WFC .... WTF
It appears that mention of your underwear is hidden from the compiler. Lucky compiler.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
It's the question that is wrong, not the answer: his answer was perfect. The question should have been: Q: Identify and define the C++ casting operators. If you can't even pose a question correctly how do you expect to be able to carry out a fair and balanced interview?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
I disagree, I think the intent of the question was clear to anybody with half a brain. We already have something that will follow the literal instructions given, their called computers. We need people who can do the fuzzy reasoning to translate a slight vague question into something definite and precise. Kinda like what you just did.
-
Well, I do agree it was a "valid" answer, but no marks were given. The guy anyways plonked the exam with several wrong answers and bad code, but the point was that I enjoyed his sense of humour and I was merely asking if people have had similar experiences. Instead of which, you were trying to assess the fairness and balance of our interview process. Hot air. :rolleyes: But thanks for responding - it was humorous anyways. :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
Instead of which, you were trying to assess the fairness and balance of our interview process. Hot air.
The fact that you laughed at his perfectly good response reflects on you, not him! (Even if was plank :-))
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
But thanks for responding - it was humorous anyways.
You should be taking it seriously!!! I don't joke!!! Ever!!! :mad::mad::mad:
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
I disagree, I think the intent of the question was clear to anybody with half a brain. We already have something that will follow the literal instructions given, their called computers. We need people who can do the fuzzy reasoning to translate a slight vague question into something definite and precise. Kinda like what you just did.
Wjousts wrote:
anybody with half a brain
and therein lies the rub...
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
I have to say it is a valid answer, a bit conservative, but still valid. (and it is hard to agree with digital man...) :)
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]CPallini wrote:
and it is hard to agree with digital man
I know I'm going to regret this but ... why?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
Instead of which, you were trying to assess the fairness and balance of our interview process. Hot air.
The fact that you laughed at his perfectly good response reflects on you, not him! (Even if was plank :-))
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
But thanks for responding - it was humorous anyways.
You should be taking it seriously!!! I don't joke!!! Ever!!! :mad::mad::mad:
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
digital man wrote:
The fact that you laughed at his perfectly good response reflects on you, not him! (Even if was plank )
I'm not sure if you got that right - I was laughing at the humour in his response, not at his 'perfectly good response' itself!
digital man wrote:
You should be taking it seriously!!! I don't joke!!! Ever!!!
I know, I know. :)
It's time for a new sig. Seriously.