When did the job market get so rude?
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
The nash equilibrium in a buyer-seller market like the employer-employee relationship is for both sides to defect. Humans don't behave optimally, because they aren't pure rational creatures, they are imbued with some socialisation and cultural memory. So humans try to treat with these organisations as though they are other humans, and will respond to good-will with good-will, but this is not rewarded, and ultimately they change their behaviour in response to a poor environment.
Capital does behave short term optimally. Optimal economic behaviour is to betray the person opposite you, and violate and exploit the commons until the commons collapses entirely, like what we see today. At some points in the past, capital has been subdued by a human operator who will apply courtesy and social norms to prevent these ugly actions, but capital has now become too intelligent to bother with this, and the result is a sequence of increasingly insane and inhuman processes, such as what we see here with the job market.
If you haven't gotten your answer, then you've gotten your answer. Fill in the likely blanks: they are busy with their day jobs and as you admit, they're assuming you already know the outcome because you bombed the technical assessment.
On to the next one.
There's no contract that someone owes you a followup email. Many times, it's better to end things instead of fakeness or platitudes.
Also, "basic manners" is ambiguous because there's no universal definition.
Regardless, there is a cost. Saying otherwise is dishonest.
To prove this, think about it:
there are so many MORE far worse outcomes that could've happened that would universally qualify as "rude." This isn't that.