Perhaps this may seem snobbish, but the reason was the style and style of communication.
What exactly is the problem?
You might think that I'm trying to present myself as a complete esthete, so I'm sitting in a tailcoat and, sticking out my little finger, sipping coffee from a porcelain cup. This is certainly not the case.
I am a web developer, therefore, the worst * subspecies of programmers - PHP and Javascript developers - are in my working circle. Jokes like “Don't like the frontend / backend? You just didn't have a normal guy! " I hear it almost every day.
And yet, these same people maintain documentation, tasks, and comments normally.
When applying for a job, there is usually written communication with team leads, department heads, or just the most experienced programmers - questions, test, feedback. Obviously, these people can give you an idea of the company. So why are they so devil-may-care about this very performance?
Claim No. 1 - grammatical and punctuation marks
Competent written speech often arises from reading a large amount of printed text. I think many have had to frown annoyedly when rereading their own text with an error. It's as obvious as a dirty fingerprint on china or an egg yolk in a beard.
All the people I talk to usually troll each other for typos. Simply because by the age of twenty-five a proletarian of mental labor is just as absurd to be mistaken in the spelling of words, as it is to a proletarian of manual labor to confuse nuts M6 and M8. The brain is calibrated.
Seeing in front of me a text written with a large number of completely obvious errors, not random typos (text / text) or autocomplete errors, but grammatical errors, I see a student on the other end of the Internet.
One could argue that we are techies, literature for the humanities and so on in this vein, but this is nonsense. Language is a trained skill and has nothing to do with moral purity or a rich inner world. Reading professional literature, at least in a minimal amount, a person quickly acquires the so-called "book" literacy, that is, begins to see mistakes in words not due to knowledge of the rules of the language, but due to sufficient reading experience. On average, according to various sources, the minimum volume of reading to obtain this ability is about a book per week for six months, that is, it is enough just to read Habr every morning on the way to work.
In light of the above, the question arises - how did these people manage to read so little and become team leaders / seniors / architects? Or did they teach technology from Lurca and Padonkaf forums from the web archive?
Separately, I admire such quality of the text in a situation when even the IDE and the browser are trying to point you errors.
We will not, of course, exclude the fact that high-class pros are already so indifferent to their image that they consider it unnecessary to spend time on correcting an error, but they do not really care about the opinion of a person from the outside.
Claim number 2 - what did the author want to tell us with his work?
The employer's representative is often slurred. Indistinct at the level of coordination of genders, numbers and cases. Indistinct at the level of the order of the members of the sentence. Like an iodine guest worker.
And I can't find an explanation for this at all. Well, let's say you can write with errors. Anything can happen, for example dysgraphia. But how can you lose the ability to formulate thoughts, I do not understand.
What, your team lead sets the task - "Write a class for access to the notify table if there is 1 rub"? Is this really a team lead? Maybe you have some kind of neural network for generating task texts?
I don't want to work like that. Nobody, probably, wants to! Why does a developer have to understand this murky stream of consciousness ?!
Sometimes it seems to me that these are some kind of pranks. A couple of times I even looked for HR profiles on social networks to make sure that it was not some schoolchildren who had such dubious fun.
And a little synergistic ** effect
What should an outside person think about your company? That the people there are excellent specialists, but they have dyslexia and free cognac in the office? Why not proofread your technician's text before submitting it? Or don't you care too?
You can work with a person if he has a lack of knowledge. It's normal to google something and find out along the way, sort out your mistakes. Although for a team lead it is strange.
You can come to terms with the fact that a person cannot express their thoughts in a coherent way. Perhaps, in fact, he operates a different system of skills for solving problems, as, for example, some mathematical geniuses for whom solving equations is reduced to operating with visual images. But even this is strange for a team lead.
But when a person has a clear failure in the field of education and does not have the opportunity to express their thoughts clearly, this is a huge problem. If you are his subordinate, then this is exactly your problem.
Unfortunately, your vacancy is not suitable for me. Thank you for your suggestion, good luck finding the right candidate.
Possible cause of the problem
Hanlon's Razor tells us that if malice or incompetence might be the cause, then incompetence is most likely the cause.
This is how many team leads with one to three years of experience are required in Russia.
It can be assumed that this is a management experience but not. At least in many vacancies they are looking for just experience with technology, not a word about management experience.
Probably the wildest ts and feedbacks were written by the same seniors with two years of experience.
* - the worst in the opinion of other programmers, primarily each other. Nevertheless, objectively speaking, these two languages are the most distant from the academic environment and production culture due to the "marginality" of the tasks being solved.
** - I strongly doubt that someone does not know this term. But it so happens that you start to place comments in the text and you can't stop. Synergy is an effect when a combination of factors gives a greater effect than each of them separately.