Hacker News Reader

Comment by Zanni | Hacker News Reader

It's like a squabble between children. Applicant with an over-inflated ego submits a sub-par writing sample. Owner with an over-inflated ego rejects it with a gratuitous insult on top of some helpful criticism. Applicant throws a fit. Owner throws it right back.

Oh, wait. Did I say "helpful criticism?" The first comment strikes out the word "subsequently," calling it "entirely unnecessary and redundant" before exhorting "Don't use unnecessary words." Well, speaking of unnecessary words, how about "entirely" and "redundant" in your own comment? The rest are in a similar vein, coupling actual criticism with needless (and antagonistic) commentary. Instead of calling out a sentence as merely "too long," he has to then label it "an absolute monstrosity."

Nice dodge, millennial job seeker. This is not someone you want to work for.

View on HN

Well said. It's also interesting how the owner justifies his behavior by talking about how his own professors similarly insulted him when he was younger. Ie, it's the exact same reasoning used by frat boys for hazing their pledges. "I was insulted and belittled last year, and therefore, I'm going to do the same to you, and one day, you'll get to pass it on to someone else." Yes, that's some fine reasoning there.

Millennials today might be willing to accept constructive criticism, but they sure aren't willing to accept insults and belittling behavior. Good for them. I'm glad we have platforms like glass door where such behavior can be publicly called out.

I also like how he casually reminds the applicant of his ivy league history.

Well you are entitled to your opinion, so am I and here it is...I feel people who waste other people's time with mediocrity deserve to be insulted. The response is justified and proportional (however harsh it may be) to the atrocity inflicted by the applicant. I hope the applicant learns from this and thinks twice before submitting sub par work.

Is there any evidence to believe the applicant had an "over-inflated ego"?

I don't think there is anything in the review to suggest that and the only piece of evidence we have is the author's claim that the applicant "sent an application and bragged about their tremendous writing ability"

My guess is he/she did not so much "brag", but included the usual snippet everyone does when trying to highlight their skills/sell themselves.

Dig a little deeper (or at least clean the dirt off the nameplate). This is a legal position and the written product is what they essentially sell. Your argument is the equivalent of hiring an applicant who submitted a regression analysis to handle time series data.

>The first comment strikes out the word "subsequently," calling it "entirely unnecessary and redundant" before exhorting "Don't use unnecessary words." Well, speaking of unnecessary words, how about "entirely" and "redundant" in your own comment?

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but are you implying that feedback/commentary should be held to same standard as what it is critiquing?

I think it should be. Lead by example.

It seems to me that having to polish all feedback to a publishable level of quality would (greatly?) reduce the amount of feedback someone could give. I've appreciated informal feedback that I've received in the past and if that was the bar that needed to met I would have likely never received anything back.

Agree. I was surprised by the length of some of the comments. Most of the editorial notes and critique I've seen are very terse.

I'd agree that, in general, you shouldn't necessarily aim for the same level of polish in feedback that you would in a piece for publication. Here, though, I think the excessive length of his comment undermines the credibility of his feedback and contributes to the sense that he's piling on the criticism.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com