6 ms·

Dan, I appreciate the thoughtful and measured response. But let me offer a counterpoint: you could apply the same logic to any comment anywhere. Take yesterday

Dan, I appreciate the thoughtful and measured response. But let me offer a counterpoint: you could apply the same logic to any comment anywhere. Take yesterday's topic on Microsoft potentially acquiring GitHub. How many anonymous comments are there slagging Microsoft (or GitHub)? No one has any way to verify the credibility of comments there, either. The question is: do complaining about a negative experience (real or imagined) present any long-term benefit to the community and to the original poster? If the comment is junk or fake then the poster has the ability to respond as such (or profess ignorance). But the community gains by either being warned about a potential job opportunity or seeing how the hirer responds. I understand not turning this into Glassdoor/Yelp bottom-feeding but I was specifically referencing the recent hiring practices of this particular company, not reviewing them as a whole or judging their leadership or corporate direction or promotion systems etc. I think if you really want no replies it should be hardcoded into the HN architecture, but the antiseptic posting of job listing, without any potential input from people who've recently gone through the process, is IMHO a loss for the HN community -- if I just want unadorned job listings, I can get that many other places than HN, and with much better filtering technology. I recognize this is a gray area but I really think commenters should be allowed to share interviewing experiences with companies who post here -- keeping HN from becoming a complaining ground is more complex than just banning comments, IMHO. Thanks for listening.

mmt 8y ago
> you could apply the same logic to any comment anywhere. That was, essentially, my point all along. Unfortunately, I think that what dang is saying is that the job posting thread requires special treatment and guidelins that are, inexplicably [1] far more strict than the overall HN guidelines, in order to protect the community from damage. > If the comment is junk or fake then the poster has the ability to respond as such (or profess ignorance). Or even not dignify it with a response! Surely, HN readers can be trusted to tell difference between "just a grudge" (or corporate equivalent of ad-hominem or any other actually off-topic comment) and a legitimate comment, even complaint, about the hiring process. > I think if you really want no replies it should be hardcoded into the HN architecture I have also suggested this in the past, especially since it won't incur any editorial/moderation effort or ambiguity. [1] This lack of explanation or reasoning is one of my recurring objections
mmt 8y ago
> the antiseptic posting of job listing, without any potential input from people who've recently gone through the process, is IMHO a loss for the HN community -- if I just want unadorned job listings, I can get that many other places than HN, and with much better filtering technology. Since it's too late to edit my previous comment, I wanted to add that, though I've advocated/suggested such comment-free posting as a technical feature, I do agree with your sentiment, overall. The only exception is that there would still be a link to the poster's HN profile, which might contain enough information to provide some context or feeling of community to the job posting. Otherwise, as you imply, there's no connection meaningful connection to HN in any of the job postings.

mmt 8y ago

> you could apply the same logic to any comment anywhere. That was, essentially, my point all along. Unfortunately, I think that what dang is saying is that the job posting thread requires special treatment and guidelins that are, inexplicably [1] far more strict than the overall HN guidelines, in order to protect the community from damage. > If the comment is junk or fake then the poster has the ability to respond as such (or profess ignorance). Or even not dignify it with a response! Surely, HN readers can be trusted to tell difference between "just a grudge" (or corporate equivalent of ad-hominem or any other actually off-topic comment) and a legitimate comment, even complaint, about the hiring process. > I think if you really want no replies it should be hardcoded into the HN architecture I have also suggested this in the past, especially since it won't incur any editorial/moderation effort or ambiguity. [1] This lack of explanation or reasoning is one of my recurring objections

mmt 8y ago

> the antiseptic posting of job listing, without any potential input from people who've recently gone through the process, is IMHO a loss for the HN community -- if I just want unadorned job listings, I can get that many other places than HN, and with much better filtering technology. Since it's too late to edit my previous comment, I wanted to add that, though I've advocated/suggested such comment-free posting as a technical feature, I do agree with your sentiment, overall. The only exception is that there would still be a link to the poster's HN profile, which might contain enough information to provide some context or feeling of community to the job posting. Otherwise, as you imply, there's no connection meaningful connection to HN in any of the job postings.