I'm currently working at a very well known international company where I got hired after getting rejected from a significant number (+50) of big international c

I'm currently working at a very well known international company where I got hired after getting rejected from a significant number (+50) of big international companies and a good number of local ones (by local I mean from my small EU country). Strangely or perhaps completely understandable, getting rejected from the local companies 'hurt' more as I was aware that the pool of candidates was significantly smaller, there was no culture issue and it felt personal when rejection email was extremely late or non existent. I pull my hat down for the people who can be completely transparent in their 'failures'. I do wonder though, if the motivation behind the 'failures-cv' is to send a sort of a message to the companies and grant boards mentioned in it, when it's done after the person writing it has had significant success. By message I mean sort of 'look guys, I'm doing relatively ok and you didn't even call me for an interview'. Also, the article sparked an idea. Perhaps a good 'heuristic' for judging companies hiring processes and especially governmental ones would be to look at not only CVs of people getting hired but also those that get rejected. Part of that thinking comes from a conversation with one of my managers who said that sometimes he has a look at CV-s classified as 'C' (he get's only A & B from HR) and he wonders why some of them were not in the A and B group.