Hacker News Reader

Comment by _sbxe | Hacker News Reader

I've been in that spot. Not quite 50 hours, but and not exactly ghosted, put a lot of real time and dedication into a lengthy project and questionnaire, to get back a 'no, sorry'.

I responded for some clarification: Where could I improve? What would make me a more attractive candidate? Nothing. We're a pretty close-knit tech community (Boulder) so it felt like a real slap in the face.

I manage dev hiring at my company, and when I give take-home assignments, I make sure to give them a timeline of no more than 2 hours. If you get to that point, it's okay to tell me what you would have done, as I should be able to tell by that point if you know what you're doing and could accomplish it.

"Busy" is not an excuse. If you've got the time to interview someone, you make the time to treat them respectfully and provide quality feedback.

View on HN

I'll echo this issue with certain companies on the Frontrange. It's good to see that I'm not the only one that is disappointed at the behavior. I'll agree with others, that it's the 'litigious' nature of CO that prevents the feedback and fear of lawsuits. That said, if the company is that afraid, then the mangers must know that the good hires out there have been burnt a few times by now and know that the time they put in will be wasted. You may as well just throw out the tests at this point and focus on networking. You'll only garner fools and the desperate with these tests, with a 'lucky' few that will prove exceptions to the rule, not the other way around. Frontrange tech is small and very close knit (there are only so many good breweries around here yall!), word gets out fast.

Thats the california mindset moving in. Colorado is not what I would call litigous.

> provide quality feedback

I always hear warnings about how this opens you up to very scary legal liability, but I'm wondering how true it is. Has anyone ever gotten into trouble providing feedback?

I guess things like "you had no social acumen and your hygiene left too much to be desired to be hireable" wouldn't go over well.

In litigation happy countries, yes, it does open you up but less so if you focus on technical facts pertaining to the job and not any personal issues.

... and, yes, I know of a few cases where honesty was not the best policy. The circumstances were quite possibly valid where others would not have felt comfortable with the individual, and potentially cost the business money, but being honest at that stage was not doing anybody any favors.

In technology, if you believe someone lacks x, y or z, to round out their skill set and you can articulate it without making it personal, I think the recipient will appreciate it - maybe not the same day as they were rejected, but it's always nice to get a perspective from an outside party. If you can't articulate the short comings then maybe focus on the good aspects and then use the generic not today, maybe in the near future kind of response... but you shouldn't ghost them.

The 2 hour timeframe makes sense for everyone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com