5 ms·

Honestly, this is the most toxic thing about job interviews for me - "hey can we do the thing where you pretend you didn't have a string of shitty jobs for 5 ye

by hobs 1y ago

Honestly, this is the most toxic thing about job interviews for me - "hey can we do the thing where you pretend you didn't have a string of shitty jobs for 5 years? because obviously you were at fault if they were shitty." Most jobs are pretty shitty, the idea that you need to demonstrate toxic positivity about how shitty it was is just so inauthentic.

cj 1y ago
Another way to think about it, are you able to tolerate the less than perfect aspect of a job while still being pleasant to coworkers. A lot of people can’t, and a lot of companies try to avoid those people.
- aleph_minus_one 1y ago
  > are you able to tolerate the less than perfect aspect of a job while still being pleasant to coworkers. I honestly tend to get much better along with cynic people (and find them much more pleasant). In other words: tastes differ.
- lucianbr 1y ago
  So a lot of companies try to avoid a lot of people? How does that work out? In my experience most companies work with a wide distribution of people. This "we avoid hiring people who have defects" reads as disconnected from reality. Nobody is perfect, and most companies are average and have average people.
- FitCodIa 1y ago
  This approach is simplistic. People can usually direct their anger and frustration, to some extent. Most of the time, there's little reason to be angry at a coworker. Even if they mess up, it's usually not a huge deal, it's relatively easy to mitigate or undo; if you need mediation, there's a manager "nearby" in the org chart to escalate to, and so on. In addition, you probably have some camaraderie from past projects and assignments etc, which provides a basis of resilience when they (or you) screw up. Staying relatively pleasant and positive is not a huge challenge. Conversely, when upper management fucks up, and refuses to take responsibility (for example: admit to making the wrong decision, or even reverse the decision), that's when cynicism runs rampant among the rank and file. And gee, what a surprise, VPs and CEOs try to avoid underlings that speak up about the screw-ups of the brass.
stuartjohnson12 1y ago
And yet despite this, miserable people who drag their misery and sorrow to every occasion and conversation continue to wander about and often will drag you down towards misery too if you let them. Avoiding misery is but a matter of self defence. The pat-down before you enter a nightclub doesn't feel great either.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
oytis 1y ago
You can demonstrate toxic positivity about the desired work place I guess? Like, focus on how amazing it is going to be and what opportunities you see here that will clearly overshadow your previous job.
eloisius 1y ago
As an interviewer it's too hard to tell if a candidate was indeed a victim of circumstance, like an acquisition that turned into a shitty job, or if they are just a disgruntled malcontent who will also be disgruntled and malcontent at your company. The downside of hiring a malcontent is huge. An interviewer can assume that most quality candidates are also aware of this dynamic and will wisely choose to represent the positive aspects of their job history. Hire a shrink to vent about the toxic shitty job.
- aleph_minus_one 1y ago
  > if they are just a disgruntled malcontent who will also be disgruntled and malcontent at your company. The downside of hiring a malcontent is huge. Honestly, I get much better along with malcontents than with these "annoyingly positive" people. So, tastes differ. > An interviewer can assume that most quality candidates are also aware of this dynamic and will wisely choose to represent the positive aspects of their job history. Many highly qualified candidates are bad actors and/or bad self-promoters.
  - achierius 1y ago
    I don't know if you and GP are using 'malcontent' to refer to the same kind of person.
    - blitzar 1y ago
      plural noun: malcontents :- a person who is dissatisfied and rebellious. In Silicon Valley that is called a Founder.
      - taormina 1y ago
        And you don’t hire founders.
        Apocryphon 1y ago
        Pithily true, but what about acquihires?
ortusdux 1y ago
"If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."
maccard 1y ago
> most jobs are pretty shitty. If everywhere smells like shit, it’s time to check under your own shoe. I’ve had shitty jobs, snd while nowhere is perfect it’s definitely a stretch to say most jobs are shitty. > the idea that you need to demonstrate toxic positivity Nobody is asking you to do that. When I’m interviewing a candidate I’m assuming that this is a situation that they’re trying to impress/show themselves and if you’re shit talking your previous jobs then what are you going to be like if we disagree, or when you are interviewing for your next job? All I’m asking for is don’t shit talk your previous jobs and managers. If you can’t do that for 45 minutes I’m not going to hire you.
- FitCodIa 1y ago
  > If everywhere smells like shit, it’s time to check under your own shoe. LOL, are you kidding? The human condition is mostly shitty.
  - lolinder 1y ago
    Most humans don't feel that way most of the time. Barring extreme cases of trauma we tend to be moderately happy regardless of circumstances. If you find yourself unable to be consistently at least neutral in a first world country that tends to be a mental health issue worth addressing.
    - FitCodIa 1y ago
      > Barring extreme cases of trauma we tend to be moderately happy regardless of circumstances This has been scientifically proved wrong. Sonja Lyubomirsky writes that people come with innate levels of happiness, and apart from temporary swings (in either direction, in response to life events and activities), and apart from hugely intrusive, foundational trauma, "level of happiness" tends to remain constant for any given person's lifetime, and said level covers a huge spectrum, when viewed across people. You can train your mind and habits to increase your happiness, but still, in her famous book, she assigns 50% weight to what level you are born with, and says that, however you fine-tune yourself only amounts to the other 50%. And, since her book was published, more recent research assigns an even higher weight to the innate level of happiness (i.e., higher than 50%). The sun does shine differently on different people, and it's not a mental health issue, it's just a given. Think about it: if someone is born with 100% happiness, and never thinks consciously about their own happiness level, they will still be more happy (1 * 0.6 + 0 * 0.4 = 0.6), roughly speaking, than a person who is born with 0% happiness, but does everything in their power to improve (0 * 0.6 + 1 * 0.4 = 0.4). > If you find yourself unable to be consistently at least /neutral/ in a first world country[,] that tends to be a mental health issue worth addressing. I do agree about this; just know that the playing field is not level at all, and people who are less than moderately happy most of the time are not outliers; they are frequent.
bityard 1y ago
Call it "inauthentic" if you want but the reality is that the people who are interviewing you know they are going to have to work with you, and 99% of people prefer working alongside those who might boost their morale by demonstrating positivity and optimism (even if somewhat manufactured) instead of dwelling insufferably on all the negatives.
dogleash 1y ago
>is just so inauthentic I agree and resent that work is just a place where I go to get lied to and lie right back. We've found that lying is a highly successful workplace strategy. But the point of the lying game is to never admit we're lying. The pretzels people will twist themselves in to avoid the cognitive dissonance of lying all the time and not wanting to be a lair is maddening. I find facing it head on is a refreshing frame. A bit of clarity taken from "The Complex Problem Of Lying For Jobs" > But over the years, I have broadened my definition of a lie, and I have realized that most of my interlocutors (including my younger self) had actually narrowed our definition of lie into uselessness in an attempt to feel better about our behavior in the job market. > If we set aside pedantic obsession over the technicalities of whether the exact words you said were a lie, as if we're all capricious djinn [...] If you have a good idea of what impression you are leaving your interlocutor with, and you are crafting statements such that the image in their head does not map to reality, then you are lying. https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/the-complex-problem-of-lying-for-jobs/ https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/the-complex-problem-of-lying...
- nemomarx 1y ago
  I feel like this is broad enough to make most social interactions lying - if someone asks how you're doing and you say "good" and don't immediately vent about issues, you're trying to create a different impression, and so on? in many polite circumstances people don't want to hear a truth, they want things to go smoothly and easily.
  - dogleash 1y ago
    >I feel like this is broad enough to make most social interactions lying They... kinda are tho. We even have a term specifically for that: "white lie." Sometimes, like in your "how are you?" example, various patterns of white lie ossify into social protocol where both participants are saying things they don't literally mean, but both participants know the game. You've probably heard of cases where anglosphere people go traveling, ask people how they are (or use any of our other non-literal pleasantries), and are surprised when a real answer is given.
freejazz 1y ago
You're already not getting past my first round.

by hobs 1y ago

cj 1y ago

Another way to think about it, are you able to tolerate the less than perfect aspect of a job while still being pleasant to coworkers. A lot of people can’t, and a lot of companies try to avoid those people.

aleph_minus_one 1y ago
> are you able to tolerate the less than perfect aspect of a job while still being pleasant to coworkers. I honestly tend to get much better along with cynic people (and find them much more pleasant). In other words: tastes differ.
lucianbr 1y ago
So a lot of companies try to avoid a lot of people? How does that work out? In my experience most companies work with a wide distribution of people. This "we avoid hiring people who have defects" reads as disconnected from reality. Nobody is perfect, and most companies are average and have average people.
FitCodIa 1y ago
This approach is simplistic. People can usually direct their anger and frustration, to some extent. Most of the time, there's little reason to be angry at a coworker. Even if they mess up, it's usually not a huge deal, it's relatively easy to mitigate or undo; if you need mediation, there's a manager "nearby" in the org chart to escalate to, and so on. In addition, you probably have some camaraderie from past projects and assignments etc, which provides a basis of resilience when they (or you) screw up. Staying relatively pleasant and positive is not a huge challenge. Conversely, when upper management fucks up, and refuses to take responsibility (for example: admit to making the wrong decision, or even reverse the decision), that's when cynicism runs rampant among the rank and file. And gee, what a surprise, VPs and CEOs try to avoid underlings that speak up about the screw-ups of the brass.

stuartjohnson12 1y ago

And yet despite this, miserable people who drag their misery and sorrow to every occasion and conversation continue to wander about and often will drag you down towards misery too if you let them. Avoiding misery is but a matter of self defence. The pat-down before you enter a nightclub doesn't feel great either.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

oytis 1y ago

You can demonstrate toxic positivity about the desired work place I guess? Like, focus on how amazing it is going to be and what opportunities you see here that will clearly overshadow your previous job.

eloisius 1y ago

As an interviewer it's too hard to tell if a candidate was indeed a victim of circumstance, like an acquisition that turned into a shitty job, or if they are just a disgruntled malcontent who will also be disgruntled and malcontent at your company. The downside of hiring a malcontent is huge. An interviewer can assume that most quality candidates are also aware of this dynamic and will wisely choose to represent the positive aspects of their job history. Hire a shrink to vent about the toxic shitty job.

aleph_minus_one 1y ago
> if they are just a disgruntled malcontent who will also be disgruntled and malcontent at your company. The downside of hiring a malcontent is huge. Honestly, I get much better along with malcontents than with these "annoyingly positive" people. So, tastes differ. > An interviewer can assume that most quality candidates are also aware of this dynamic and will wisely choose to represent the positive aspects of their job history. Many highly qualified candidates are bad actors and/or bad self-promoters.
- achierius 1y ago
  I don't know if you and GP are using 'malcontent' to refer to the same kind of person.
  - blitzar 1y ago
    plural noun: malcontents :- a person who is dissatisfied and rebellious. In Silicon Valley that is called a Founder.
    - taormina 1y ago
      And you don’t hire founders.
      - Apocryphon 1y ago
        Pithily true, but what about acquihires?

ortusdux 1y ago

"If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."

maccard 1y ago

> most jobs are pretty shitty. If everywhere smells like shit, it’s time to check under your own shoe. I’ve had shitty jobs, snd while nowhere is perfect it’s definitely a stretch to say most jobs are shitty. > the idea that you need to demonstrate toxic positivity Nobody is asking you to do that. When I’m interviewing a candidate I’m assuming that this is a situation that they’re trying to impress/show themselves and if you’re shit talking your previous jobs then what are you going to be like if we disagree, or when you are interviewing for your next job? All I’m asking for is don’t shit talk your previous jobs and managers. If you can’t do that for 45 minutes I’m not going to hire you.

FitCodIa 1y ago
> If everywhere smells like shit, it’s time to check under your own shoe. LOL, are you kidding? The human condition is mostly shitty.
- lolinder 1y ago
  Most humans don't feel that way most of the time. Barring extreme cases of trauma we tend to be moderately happy regardless of circumstances. If you find yourself unable to be consistently at least neutral in a first world country that tends to be a mental health issue worth addressing.
  - FitCodIa 1y ago
    > Barring extreme cases of trauma we tend to be moderately happy regardless of circumstances This has been scientifically proved wrong. Sonja Lyubomirsky writes that people come with innate levels of happiness, and apart from temporary swings (in either direction, in response to life events and activities), and apart from hugely intrusive, foundational trauma, "level of happiness" tends to remain constant for any given person's lifetime, and said level covers a huge spectrum, when viewed across people. You can train your mind and habits to increase your happiness, but still, in her famous book, she assigns 50% weight to what level you are born with, and says that, however you fine-tune yourself only amounts to the other 50%. And, since her book was published, more recent research assigns an even higher weight to the innate level of happiness (i.e., higher than 50%). The sun does shine differently on different people, and it's not a mental health issue, it's just a given. Think about it: if someone is born with 100% happiness, and never thinks consciously about their own happiness level, they will still be more happy (1 * 0.6 + 0 * 0.4 = 0.6), roughly speaking, than a person who is born with 0% happiness, but does everything in their power to improve (0 * 0.6 + 1 * 0.4 = 0.4). > If you find yourself unable to be consistently at least /neutral/ in a first world country[,] that tends to be a mental health issue worth addressing. I do agree about this; just know that the playing field is not level at all, and people who are less than moderately happy most of the time are not outliers; they are frequent.

bityard 1y ago

Call it "inauthentic" if you want but the reality is that the people who are interviewing you know they are going to have to work with you, and 99% of people prefer working alongside those who might boost their morale by demonstrating positivity and optimism (even if somewhat manufactured) instead of dwelling insufferably on all the negatives.

dogleash 1y ago

>is just so inauthentic I agree and resent that work is just a place where I go to get lied to and lie right back. We've found that lying is a highly successful workplace strategy. But the point of the lying game is to never admit we're lying. The pretzels people will twist themselves in to avoid the cognitive dissonance of lying all the time and not wanting to be a lair is maddening. I find facing it head on is a refreshing frame. A bit of clarity taken from "The Complex Problem Of Lying For Jobs" > But over the years, I have broadened my definition of a lie, and I have realized that most of my interlocutors (including my younger self) had actually narrowed our definition of lie into uselessness in an attempt to feel better about our behavior in the job market. > If we set aside pedantic obsession over the technicalities of whether the exact words you said were a lie, as if we're all capricious djinn [...] If you have a good idea of what impression you are leaving your interlocutor with, and you are crafting statements such that the image in their head does not map to reality, then you are lying. https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/the-complex-problem-of-lying-for-jobs/ https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/the-complex-problem-of-lying...

nemomarx 1y ago
I feel like this is broad enough to make most social interactions lying - if someone asks how you're doing and you say "good" and don't immediately vent about issues, you're trying to create a different impression, and so on? in many polite circumstances people don't want to hear a truth, they want things to go smoothly and easily.
- dogleash 1y ago
  >I feel like this is broad enough to make most social interactions lying They... kinda are tho. We even have a term specifically for that: "white lie." Sometimes, like in your "how are you?" example, various patterns of white lie ossify into social protocol where both participants are saying things they don't literally mean, but both participants know the game. You've probably heard of cases where anglosphere people go traveling, ask people how they are (or use any of our other non-literal pleasantries), and are surprised when a real answer is given.

freejazz 1y ago

You're already not getting past my first round.