3 ms·

No, my work is about my work. If you're happy with my work, you, as my current manager at a company I already work for, have no business checking up on my Link

No, my work is about my work. If you're happy with my work, you, as my current manager at a company I already work for, have no business checking up on my LinkedIn profile. If you're not happy with my work, checking up on my LinkedIn profile isn't going to make you any happier.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
I wouldn't be looking if I was happy with the person's work. Empathetic managers trust their employees when they say a task is difficult and will take longer than expected. Double job workers (and slackers in general) thrive on taking advantage of this empathy by lying and manipulating their way into perceptions that they are doing more work than they really are. Not fair to the manager, company, or team mates. It's basic due diligence of any manager to check these things.
- actually_a_dog 5y ago
  No, it's a waste of time and you being nosy. If you're not happy with my work, your responsibility is to come to me and tell me that, then see if we can work together to get to a point where you are happy. Tell me honestly for a second: if you weren't happy with someone's work, would anything on (or not on) their LinkedIn profile make any difference to that situation whatsoever?
  - PragmaticPulp 5y ago
    > Tell me honestly for a second: if you weren't happy with someone's work, would anything on (or not on) their LinkedIn profile make any difference to that situation whatsoever? The LinkedIn point was about looking for clues that you might need to investigate further. I think you're trying to twist my statement into something else entirely.
    - actually_a_dog 5y ago
      Is that an admission? Being evasive about the question is not a good look. It's precisely what you're accusing the employee of here.
      - cruelty2 5y ago
        actually_a_dog 5y ago
        Prisoner's dilemma, I guess?
        cruelty2 5y ago
      - dang 5y ago
        You've been breaking the site guidelines badly in this thread, particularly these: "Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine." "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." And some of these cases have been egregious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668822 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668822 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668427 Those kinds of comment are bannable offences on HN. I don't want to ban you, but this has been a problem many times before, and we need it to stop. Can you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules in the future?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

I wouldn't be looking if I was happy with the person's work. Empathetic managers trust their employees when they say a task is difficult and will take longer than expected. Double job workers (and slackers in general) thrive on taking advantage of this empathy by lying and manipulating their way into perceptions that they are doing more work than they really are. Not fair to the manager, company, or team mates. It's basic due diligence of any manager to check these things.

actually_a_dog 5y ago
No, it's a waste of time and you being nosy. If you're not happy with my work, your responsibility is to come to me and tell me that, then see if we can work together to get to a point where you are happy. Tell me honestly for a second: if you weren't happy with someone's work, would anything on (or not on) their LinkedIn profile make any difference to that situation whatsoever?
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  > Tell me honestly for a second: if you weren't happy with someone's work, would anything on (or not on) their LinkedIn profile make any difference to that situation whatsoever? The LinkedIn point was about looking for clues that you might need to investigate further. I think you're trying to twist my statement into something else entirely.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    Is that an admission? Being evasive about the question is not a good look. It's precisely what you're accusing the employee of here.
    - cruelty2 5y ago
      - actually_a_dog 5y ago
        Prisoner's dilemma, I guess?
        cruelty2 5y ago
    - dang 5y ago
      You've been breaking the site guidelines badly in this thread, particularly these: "Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine." "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." And some of these cases have been egregious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668822 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668822 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29668427 Those kinds of comment are bannable offences on HN. I don't want to ban you, but this has been a problem many times before, and we need it to stop. Can you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules in the future?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]