The problem is that a lying liar will also have a resumé like yours. How can I — who have never met you, and have no-one I trust recommending you to me — differentiate between gaius the awesome developer and gaius-prime the lying liar? I've got to administer some sort of test to distinguish the two, and the likeliest sort seems to me to be one which attempts to discern whether one knows the sort of stuff gaius would know, and gaius-prime wouldn't.
Which makes asking for a resume, rather pointless. There would likely be a lot more acceptance of fizzbuzz take home tests and so on; if that was instead of writing up resumes (replace one time suck with another instead of adding a second one in). However that makes it hard to justify paying recruiters.
Given how Da Vinchi had a resume its amazing we still use them. (His was better thoigh, it had his name and address, dates he worked for people and their names and address)
>Which makes asking for a resume, rather pointless.
I wouldn't go that far. It still weeds out the honest-but-unqualified with minimal effort - it's basically a good early filter. This actually works for the candidate too - how much would it suck to 6 hours of interviews and then get told you don't have the right degree or some such?
I can tell within 10 minutes if someone is genuine or not just by talking through real, representative scenarios. If the job really involved implementing red-black trees from scratch, then and only then bring it up!
