I dislike it because there's no way anyone knows that much about the nuances of a language. What's 100%? You could have created it, but now it's got open source contributors so you aren't the only one working on every nook and cranny.
Meanwhile, my coworkers love it to get a feel for what stacks the candidate is more comfortable in. Just list things in descending order and don't list anything you can't speak to.
Apparently, my math/stats background means I'm the only one bothered by this at work, but it is totally a hill I'll die on. There's no measure for the scale. I'd rather see skills woven into experience/projects than with progress bars.
Would you have liked it better if it looked something like this?
Technologies I'm using every day:
Technologies I'm using every other week:
Technologies I've heard my coworkers use:
I wouldn't add technologies I can't "defend". I've heard about RISC-V and I have a really vague idea of how it works but I'd never put it anywhere in a CV.
You should only list things you're prepared to get asked about and I personally don't know much about instruction set architectures :D
So maybe stop at the second category :D
I was over-exaggerating a bit, my intention was to try and come up with alternative to the star rating that compares skills between each other rather than claiming to be 10/10 at something. :)
Hmmm... I do like that at least there's a context for the ratings, but if this were in the US / on a resume, I'd wonder why you're using space explaining your rating scheme to me. With 1 page, instead of having ratings and an explanation of what the ratings mean, I'd rather see the skills woven into more line items of what you've done.
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.