3 ms·
"- chasing an irrelevant point (the interviewer specifically wanted to move on. NEVER stop that, that is the one single that can cost you a job)." Below you st
by emini 17y ago
"- chasing an irrelevant point (the interviewer specifically wanted to move on. NEVER stop that, that is the one single that can cost you a job)."
Below you state 'everything is relevant'
"- assuming importance (his tone suggests he thinks he knew more than the interviewer. I imagine that might have come across in the interview)"
How can you assume the interviewer knows more?
"- assuming ingorance (if it seems amazing the interviewer is clueless on something then it probably isnt true. Adjust appropriately.)"
How can you assume that is true?
I would not want to work for ignorant douche bags like you. No wonder why this country is fucked up.
- ErrantX 17y agoGood arguments (apart from the insults: conversely I wouldnt employ you because you dont appear to see any subtlety in all of this). Look, I wasnt trying to say the interviewer is superior to the interviewee. Definitely not. But I am saying dont treat them like "ignorant douchebags" and dont assume you know more than them. Potentially you do - but assuming that is the case is a fallacy because you probably end up coming across wrong..