[flagged]

lovelearning 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Wait, is everyone who posts on who wants to be hired a sad down-and-out unemployed waif at the end of their rope?

That should be the assumption in an ethical society. Especially given the current economic context. Veil of ignorance principle.

> It makes it out to be unhireable charity cases.

Any "hireable" expert can run into bad luck. A person down on their luck doesn't imply "unhireable." Those recruiters who assume something so illogical - well, perhaps job seekers in this forum are overall better off without such illogical recruiters in the pool. If they make such a wrong assumption at the start, who knows what other illogical assumptions they'll make once the job starts.

> I have been lucky to find employment...

Irrelevant

▲

BatmanAoD 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't understand your point; what other type of messages are you saying should be acceptable as a response to a post about career troubles?

▲

llm_nerd 2 days ago | parent [-]

Someone posted an interest in a field in a who-wants-to-be-hired thread. A lot of people who investigate job openings aren't actually experiencing "career troubles", nor are they "desperate" as other comments noted. Again, we're talking about that thread, not this follow up submission.

They then complained that someone spammed them and it got their hopes up (which is kind of strange, fwiw). Then they detailed their career troubles. That is orthogonal.

So people are saying "leave the poors in the who wants to be hired thread alone!". It's comically patronizing.

This whole thread is hilarious and sad. I think the most sad is that guy in a parallel comment who notes that there are millionaires (!) that participate here so everyone should be on their best behaviour! How unbelievably pathetic.

	▲	BatmanAoD 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I still don't understand your point. The comment you responded to says: >As a general rule, if someone ever posts any kind of career troubles on any platform, the only correct responses should contain sympathy or a relevant career opportunity. Do you disagree with that? Do you just disagree with the use of the phrase "career troubles"?

▲

cmrdporcupine 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You're right. It's obviously a mix. And I'm like you, I put it out there to see what will come up, but I won't starve tomorrow.

Still, the sentiment of: professionals should behave professionally, and this forum should be collegial and also recognize things are pretty tough out there for many people right now... that stands.

FWIW I lived through the .com crash and what is going on right now maybe isn't the same intensity of depth of job loss but the churn and intensity absolutely going on for longer and with far more ambiguity.

	▲	ChrisMarshallNY 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		This is a professional forum. I mean, even more important than LinkedIn, because it connects founders and top industry people, directly with folks at all stages of their careers. One thing that sometimes stuns me, is that some people treat this like it's a personal Reddit sub or a Facebook comments section. They insult each other, and show their ass in a big way. I assume this is because of the casual, accessible nature of the site. Billionaires probably have better things to do, but there's a lot of multi-millionaire C-suiters, here. Their profiles look just as ratty as a new grad's, though, so I guess people don't understand that. I still like it, because that behavior is a tiny part of the experience (partly/mostly due to the great moderation). I usually find that I enjoy a lot of the discussion here. LinkedIn just sucks. I spend exactly zero time, there.

▲

reaperducer 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Wait, is everyone who posts on who wants to be hired a sad down-and-out unemployed waif at the end of their rope?

Stereotypical HN response. Jump in with a contrarian response because everything is black or white. Everything is 1 or 0. There is no subtlety; no shades of gray.

	▲	llm_nerd 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		What irony. The comment I responded to considers posts to those threads "career troubles". Others define the base as "desperate" and "unemployed". All coached in a language of "leave the poors alone". Who, exactly, is doing the black or white, here? You seem to be saying I am (you had to pipe up with your contrarian nonsense), because I point it out? Get a grip. Spam and spammers suck. People doing the weird white knighting, however, do no favours to anyone.