5 ms·

You’re saying you 1. Look at a candidate’s LinkedIn 2. See common colleagues and reach out, unbeknownst to the candidate 3. Hear negative feedback and just tru

by mlthoughts2018 6y ago

You’re saying you 1. Look at a candidate’s LinkedIn 2. See common colleagues and reach out, unbeknownst to the candidate 3. Hear negative feedback and just trust it’s true (or at minimum develop a strong bias against the candidate based on hearsay) with no due process for the candidate 4. Reject the candidate / omit them from interview processes to begin with. I’m sorry but that’s just awful. I have great references who would say positive things about working with me, but I absolutely would never want someone like you to be able to find them like this.

ghaff 6y ago
So I should just take the feedback of your handpicked references? ADDED: And I hate to break it to you but companies do this all the time with or without LinkedIn. On numerous occasions, I've been asked if I know do-and-so because we worked in the same space. Sometimes I don't know them. Sometimes I give an enthusiastic recommendation. And sometimes I tell them to run away fast.
- mlthoughts2018 6y ago
  I didn’t say they were my hand picked references. You could contact lots of references for me, many of whom I haven’t kept in touch with for a long time. My point is I have “nothing to hide” so to speak about my work experience or my resume - but despite this if I felt an employer was trying to use publicly shared personal network info to track this down, then that is a horrific employer to avoid. That’s why I’m not on LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. It’s not just that the companies backing the platforms are corrupt, but that you cannot trust others to exercise basic human decency in how they consume and use the available data. It’s a prisoner’s dilemma sort of problem. If companies & recruiters are going to instantly defect (eg bad faith usage of your data without affording you due process) then it leaves individuals no choice but to also defect (abandon shared data platforms).
  - stared 6y ago
    How you would envision a good screening process?
    - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
      It’s crazy to me that you ask this, as though “treat candidates with respect” or “give candidates fair due process to explain their past or background” or “avoid seeking out biasing information before giving a candidate a chance to represent themselves” need some extra justification to be considered as part of a “good screening process”.
      - stared 6y ago
        > It’s crazy to me that you ask this, as though “treat candidates with respect” Well, THB, hard to fight with this strawman/framing. Not sure what you consider "respect" other than "believe 100% what they say and write about themselves, however suspicious", don't consult anyone (even companies/people they wrote themselves in Resume / on LinkedIn), etc.
        mlthoughts2018 6y ago
        This is why I think it’s crazy. Suddenly “believe people and give them a fair chance” is strawman level unusual and needs scare quotes?
stared 6y ago
I interviewed them, BTW. Some things looked fishy (e.g. impressive tech, but all of the repos they listed were cloned, with trivial changes). It turned out that I knew their last CEO. It turned out that the candidate made-up the entry (exchanged emails, was given a task, never showed up, or emailed or anything) and claimed a 3-month internship experience. It is much worse than having a bad opinion on an employee (in the later, sure - maybe just the relationship, or the project, didn't work out). Hand-picked references are always, ekhm, hand-picked. I am not a judge so - I am interested in finding the best candidate, not to give anyone "a due process". And while many people are reasonably honest (sadly, there is some kind of social approval for soft-lies on interviews) some may totally invent their CV. And you never know with whom you talk.

ghaff 6y ago

So I should just take the feedback of your handpicked references? ADDED: And I hate to break it to you but companies do this all the time with or without LinkedIn. On numerous occasions, I've been asked if I know do-and-so because we worked in the same space. Sometimes I don't know them. Sometimes I give an enthusiastic recommendation. And sometimes I tell them to run away fast.

mlthoughts2018 6y ago
I didn’t say they were my hand picked references. You could contact lots of references for me, many of whom I haven’t kept in touch with for a long time. My point is I have “nothing to hide” so to speak about my work experience or my resume - but despite this if I felt an employer was trying to use publicly shared personal network info to track this down, then that is a horrific employer to avoid. That’s why I’m not on LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. It’s not just that the companies backing the platforms are corrupt, but that you cannot trust others to exercise basic human decency in how they consume and use the available data. It’s a prisoner’s dilemma sort of problem. If companies & recruiters are going to instantly defect (eg bad faith usage of your data without affording you due process) then it leaves individuals no choice but to also defect (abandon shared data platforms).
- stared 6y ago
  How you would envision a good screening process?
  - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
    It’s crazy to me that you ask this, as though “treat candidates with respect” or “give candidates fair due process to explain their past or background” or “avoid seeking out biasing information before giving a candidate a chance to represent themselves” need some extra justification to be considered as part of a “good screening process”.
    - stared 6y ago
      > It’s crazy to me that you ask this, as though “treat candidates with respect” Well, THB, hard to fight with this strawman/framing. Not sure what you consider "respect" other than "believe 100% what they say and write about themselves, however suspicious", don't consult anyone (even companies/people they wrote themselves in Resume / on LinkedIn), etc.
      - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
        This is why I think it’s crazy. Suddenly “believe people and give them a fair chance” is strawman level unusual and needs scare quotes?

stared 6y ago

I interviewed them, BTW. Some things looked fishy (e.g. impressive tech, but all of the repos they listed were cloned, with trivial changes). It turned out that I knew their last CEO. It turned out that the candidate made-up the entry (exchanged emails, was given a task, never showed up, or emailed or anything) and claimed a 3-month internship experience. It is much worse than having a bad opinion on an employee (in the later, sure - maybe just the relationship, or the project, didn't work out). Hand-picked references are always, ekhm, hand-picked. I am not a judge so - I am interested in finding the best candidate, not to give anyone "a due process". And while many people are reasonably honest (sadly, there is some kind of social approval for soft-lies on interviews) some may totally invent their CV. And you never know with whom you talk.