3 ms·

> It's so common place that few are going to remember they applied to a specific company years ago to begin with. Additionally, it take a single lazily-managed

> It's so common place that few are going to remember they applied to a specific company years ago to begin with. Additionally, it take a single lazily-managed spreadsheet to identify this dysfunction. Surely any positive effect from doing this would be muted (again, likely into the negative) because the company doesn't want to hire you.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
>Surely any positive effect from doing this would be muted (again, likely into the negative) because the company doesn't want to hire you. In my experience, it's because they didn't actually see you (or they were never hiring anyone to begin with. Hence the article). If I don't get to a step where I speak to a human, I don't really count it as a rejection. Just a filtering. Rejection implies that my skillset was not fit to the role, or that someone else was better than me and selected. Definitely not the vibes I get in this current market.
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  > In my experience, it's because they didn't actually see you Are we supposed to simply assume that nobody ever reads any application we send in? I don't see how this works out anyway but negatively for the company. If I don't hear back from you, I'll just assume you don't want to hire me. There's no semantic difference in my mind between this and sending me a note that you've read and rejected my resume—especially in an industry where it's normal to simply ghost someone rather than issue a formal rejection. I see we're talking in circles. I'll drop the conversation.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    In this modern market? Yes. Hence the article. It's the Tree falls metaphor in my eyes, and in this specific case it does not make a sound as far as I'm concerned. But if you're taking my "assumption" as an absolute, I don't know what to say. An assumption based on this precise slice of time. Not something that will always be true in all contexts. It's not even always true in this context. >There's no semantic difference in my mind between this and sending me a note that you've read and rejected my resume Bots don't send hand written notes. They can, but the costs are a much higher margin than an auto reject email. You're pretty close to what my main point is, though. Bots aren't an automatic bad, but there feels to be zero effort on the recruiting end this day to try and get quality candidates. That lack of care means I shouldn't spend any energy regarding their (lack of) feedback if all I'm getting back is slop. So I'll just spin the AI roulette again. Take care.

johnnyanmac 2y ago

>Surely any positive effect from doing this would be muted (again, likely into the negative) because the company doesn't want to hire you. In my experience, it's because they didn't actually see you (or they were never hiring anyone to begin with. Hence the article). If I don't get to a step where I speak to a human, I don't really count it as a rejection. Just a filtering. Rejection implies that my skillset was not fit to the role, or that someone else was better than me and selected. Definitely not the vibes I get in this current market.

PittleyDunkin 2y ago
> In my experience, it's because they didn't actually see you Are we supposed to simply assume that nobody ever reads any application we send in? I don't see how this works out anyway but negatively for the company. If I don't hear back from you, I'll just assume you don't want to hire me. There's no semantic difference in my mind between this and sending me a note that you've read and rejected my resume—especially in an industry where it's normal to simply ghost someone rather than issue a formal rejection. I see we're talking in circles. I'll drop the conversation.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  In this modern market? Yes. Hence the article. It's the Tree falls metaphor in my eyes, and in this specific case it does not make a sound as far as I'm concerned. But if you're taking my "assumption" as an absolute, I don't know what to say. An assumption based on this precise slice of time. Not something that will always be true in all contexts. It's not even always true in this context. >There's no semantic difference in my mind between this and sending me a note that you've read and rejected my resume Bots don't send hand written notes. They can, but the costs are a much higher margin than an auto reject email. You're pretty close to what my main point is, though. Bots aren't an automatic bad, but there feels to be zero effort on the recruiting end this day to try and get quality candidates. That lack of care means I shouldn't spend any energy regarding their (lack of) feedback if all I'm getting back is slop. So I'll just spin the AI roulette again. Take care.