8 ms·

Great, that's n = 1. For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made s

Great, that's n = 1. For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. Most people who worked at one FAANG also eventually work at one more during their careers. So if you screw over one FAANG, you'll have a hard time at 40% of FAANG. It doesn't stop there. God forbid you live in the Bay Area, and you and I perhaps cross paths at a party, Burning Man, or any other event. And for crying out loud, you better not be connected to me on Linkedin, because people will be reaching out for backchannel references for the rest of your career. The tricky thing about all this is that you'll never know. People will just magically stop responding, when you felt that things were going great. In my career of 20 years, I've probably been professionally disappointed in something like 4 or 5 people, and I can definitely think of 2 who have resurfaced in my life one way or another. Tech is a huge space when you're starting out. But as your career accelerates and you end up gaining more visibility, that same space becomes very small very quickly. I would not mess with my reputation, as a matter of principle, but also as a matter of prudence.

l33t2328 4y ago
> God forbid you live in the Bay Area, and you and I perhaps cross paths at a party, Burning Man, or any other event What, you’ll be so personally slighted that this person made a business decision that you’ll ensure to disrupt everyone else’s time at burning man/a party/ any other event?
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  I like how you minimize the ethical implications by calling it a business decision. I do agree that screwing over a family member is different than screwing over a colleague, but let's also agree that both are bad. And what appears to be a "business decision" could be a serious setback for the person on the other side of this transaction. Granted, as a startup founder, I am more exposed than someone at FAANG, but don't fool yourself - either way, someone wasted a lot of time and money on giving you a shot, and more importantly, they declined all other candidates. It really is such a selfish thing to do, and while sometimes you have no choice (health, etc), I didn't get the feeling from the OP that he felt particularly bad about it. So to get back to your original question - no, I wouldn't give you a pass because you showed your dirty side in a business context. And if I thought you were dishonest, I would assume that your dishonesty extends across all facets of your life, and I would think I'd be doing my friends a favor by letting them know.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    I hate to be blunt. But as a startup founder, you probably don’t matter to many of the posters on HN. Most startup founders pay below what we could get at a public company and all you could offer is “equity” that would be statistically worthless.
    - hn_neverguess 4y ago
      No need to apologize - what you're sharing is the accepted truism. And yes, it makes it hard to compete for the same talent that's also considering FAANG. I will be even more blunt - yes, you're likely to retire sooner if you took a FAANG job. But there are three caveats: 1. That last statement is only true because most of the people who start or join a startup don't see a material increase in the value of their equity. But a little known secret in the startup world is that you only have to be right once. It doesn't matter one tiny bit if your previous 5 startups failed, if the 6th one ends up finding the product market fit. My batting average is pretty poor, and even so I am way ahead of anyone I grew up with. You only have to be right once. 2. People think of startup success as this all or nothing thing, where you're either super poor or super rich. In reality, if you give it your best and do a decent job, even if you end up failing you'll be getting calls from people who you would have never met in any other way. For example, I failed with a startup about 10 years ago and ended up at Square only because of that exact same failure. There's no way in hell it would have happened any other way. 3. Most startups are run by first-time founders, and most first-time founders are still early in their learning process. A direct consequence of that is that they are cheap. But every once in a while you come across someone who's had one or two big exits, and I guarantee you that they are thinking differently about comp. In PG's words, Apple could have given Steve Jobs 95% of their equity to lure him back, and it still would have been a great deal for them. Experienced startup founders know that, and they have levers that FAANG doesn't. There are two senior people in my current startup that I poached directly out of FAANG.
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
        1. "You only have to be right once"... out of how many times? 1/6? 1/10? Much worse? This caveat is nothing but an ad for lottery tickets. 2. Sure, startups are a fine place to hone your talents, show your worth, and network. Same as any other type of workplace. Who's to say you wouldn't have met someone else at a big company who could've gotten you into Square? 3. For every serial entrepreneur who truly has a knack for it and truly learned along the way, there are those who are persisting in error. You're combining your first and second caveats here, describing the possibility of networking one's way into working for a quality experienced founder who will be your lottery ticket. Nothing wrong with startups, but this is just another set of hoary old truisms more optimistic than the previous one.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
TechD00d 4y ago
I recommend NOT attempting malicious demolition of the careers of others; it’s not only unethical but it also can land one in a massive heap of legal trouble. Attorneys love actions like those active career sabotage “revenge” tactics you’re describing, and sooner or later, someone employing them will learn the hard way. If they’re lucky and get smarter, they’ll end up just having to write a public letter of apology they share with the world (including those they defamed the former employee to). It will have a negative impact on their own career and probably sink their chances of ever raising money again. If they’re less lucky or unwilling to address an attorney’s letter, they’ll end up having to pay a fat seven figure settlement, attorney’s fees, and a letter of apology. VCs will be most unimpressed. And in some cases, if they’re willing enough to go to court, they’ll be facing having their communications subpoenaed, their professional network subpoenaed and deposed about the comments, and will end up with a seven or eight figure judgment including punitive damages. VCs won’t even reply to their communications, and anyone deposed will associate the angry would-be saboteur with legal trouble.
dudul 4y ago
> For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. Well, see, I don't even need to work with you to know I wouldn't enjoy it :). Spiteful much? And guess what, I bet the tech industry is big enough that it will never happen, so cheers.
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  I could respond with something equally snarky, but that would detract from the point I am trying to make. I would recommend you reread my message and try not to take it personally but instead ask yourself if there's a chance that the tech industry is not as big as you make it out to be. I'll give you two things to think about: 1. Most people never gain any amount of visibility in their lives, and that's fine. But why prevent that from at least being a possibility? What if it turns out that you have something interesting to say and there's a ton of people who want to hear it (eg: you become a VC or an expert in something). Not being able to benefit from having a personal brand should the opportunity present itself would be a hell of a bummer. You'll notice that I am being very careful with my own identity when giving unpopular feedback. 2. Sure, in 2022 it would be hard for a startup in Iowa to learn that you screwed someone over in Florida. But do you really want to bet that the same will be true in 2042? In the last 20 years, we went from no social graph at all to a social graph in every slice of our lives. What are the odds that in the next 20 years we won't see continued progress towards transparency and accountability? Reputations have never mattered more, and will only do more so in the future.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    Orthogonal to this entire debate on employee conduct, what you call "transparency and accountability" is synonymous with social surveillance and the erosion of privacy. Instead of a state-mandated social credit system, you're describing societal norms giving way to an ad hoc total information awareness as pushed by social media websites and search engines, public record indexing companies and grassroots doxxers. Let us pray in twenty years more countries will enshrine the right to be forgotten.
doctor_eval 4y ago
burning man?
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  I met more tech friends at burning man than any other place outside my workplaces.
  - doctor_eval 4y ago
    I don’t really want to engage but this is really bugging me. Now, I haven’t been to burning man, but I’ve been to plenty of bush doofs, and if I bumped into someone who’d ghosted me for a job I’d be like; man, what happened? you really missed out. How ‘bout a hug? There are better ways to deal with adversity in the world than to go on the attack and threaten people’s livelihoods. Even if their decision impacted you adversely, it doesn’t give you the right to fuck someone over in retaliation.
scarface74 4y ago
Your statement sounds much like the old “if you get caught doing $x at school it will go on your permanent record”. BigTech is so vast that unless you do something egregious it’s hard not to get hired back at the same one, let alone a competitor. For every you that wouldn’t hire the parent posters, there are hundreds of managers that will. No part of the hiring loop at major tech companies for ICs that I am aware of involves checking references. We definitely don’t do that as part of the loop. Our entire hiring process is based on how well you do in the interview.
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  Elsewhere in this thread I pointed out that you would want to future proof your actions for the rest of your career. I wouldn't bet on the visibility of my actions being the same today as it will be in 20 years from now.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    I’m 48 and I’ve been in the industry since I was 22. I’ve worked in companies with 10 people all the way to second largest employer in the country. In 20 years if I’m still having to work, I need to rethink my life choices. That being said, especially with the acceleration of remote work (I live on the opposite coast) Opportunities are vast.
mynameisvlad 4y ago
> For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. Do you have a "burn book" of people who have wronged you or something? How would you even realize it's the same person a decade down the line? Why would you even care?
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  Sure, if you couldn't care less about your job, then why care about anyone else screwing you over in your job? But let's see if the inverse is true as well. If you deeply deeply deeply cared about your job (eg: it's your startup and you have exactly 12 months of runway, but it takes 4 months to source, vet, hire and onboard someone), would it matter to you that someone cheated you out of a third of your runway? The truth is likely somewhere in the middle. That should answer why someone who is likely to reasonable care about their job and would likely experience a serious setback in their work would be really upset about the OP's actions.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    I doubt that anyone, even someone as extreme as your example, would care enough about it a decade after it happened. More egregious things would have happened in the meantime.
    - hn_neverguess 4y ago
      Extending a job offer to someone means you met with them on multiple occasions, remotely and in person. I know I am not going to forget their face in 10 years. Would I feel a bit less wronged about them after 10 years? Of course. Would I lie in a backchannel reference? No.
      - mynameisvlad 4y ago
        I doubt your memory and vengeance is nearly as crazy a decade since any event (however wronged by it you may perceive yourself to be) -- let alone something as incredibly benign as someone rescinding an offer. In short, while you say that now, I highly doubt it actually would be the case were this hypothetical a reality. You'd have to be incredibly thin-skinned and vengeful to carry this much weight to something so minor.
geoka9 4y ago
I get your point, but if, after extending an offer (and having it accepted) you suddenly found out the role has been "made redundant", would go out of your way to get your executive compensation reduced so that the new hire could stay and you wouldn't have to "burn bridges" with the person? I'm not taking sides here, but am curious to see your argument.
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  I've been a startup founder for the last 20 years, and the short answer is yes. I did exactly that same thing in 2020 to help onboard someone in February who we otherwise wouldn't have been able to keep. Our board asked for a hiring freeze, and I pushed through a candidate by cutting my salary by 50% (I would have done it anyway out of principle, but that's a different story). I know a lot of other startup CEOs who lowered their salaries to help extend their runways.
  - User23 4y ago
    That's rational. If a startup CEO is motivated by salary rather than equity, that's terrible for everyone involved, from the investors on down to the early employees.
aghtk 4y ago
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  I would be ok with just "honest."
ipaddr 4y ago
As someone with more than 20 years experience.. I always feared what you mentioned but your post made me question that fear. Small companies may hold it against you and you may never have a chance to work their again but what are the odds they have a matching role and would you ever apply again. The industry keeps getting bigger. I have never run into anyone I ever worked with in any other company. I don't think it really matters. The chances of seeing someone at a party or burning man or a ghost reference (they want your opinion on someone you never worked with?) is literally 0. If you told everyone/everywhere it would make people question you.. why doesn't this great candidate (you wanted to hire them) decide to back out. What is wrong with this manager/team.. bonus is if you are successful impacting their career they can personally sue and take everything you own.
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  [dead]
  - ipaddr 4y ago
    For most social media I go under a different name and never invite people I work with. For something like linkedin over the years the number of connections reaches thousands and any mutual connection will be connected to 2nd, 3rd headhunters. Trying to find the back channel person would be like whack a mole. If I work with 100-300 people over a 5 years period the number of new companies would be in the 10,000+ range. The growth has been crazy. Those reference checks target companies on your resume not positions you didn't accept. This is happening more often because of long hiring cycles where candidates invest so much time in multiple rounds that offers and deadlines often do not align. I use to be able to target one company and find out quickly (one interview, maybe a test) if there was an offer. It literally takes 4-8 rounds where any one round can knock you out. Having said that I've never pulled my acceptance. Once time I quit after the first day.. One small room that was so crowded it wasn't going to work (the interview happened elsewhere). The first few months are a trial for both parties.
erosenbe0 4y ago
I hope you're stance assumes you know why the candidate reversed. If you don't know for a fact that it was a cynical or frivolous ploy, then it can't have much bearing on their reputation. Perhaps they accepted the offer, closed their search, and something came up. Perhaps a bad thing, such as cancer or rehab or mental care, or a neutral thing like their military spouse was transferred.
- hn_neverguess 4y ago
  The OP made it sound like it's not a big deal to do what he did. My reaction is based on that context.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
ryanbrunner 4y ago
Ask yourself honestly, in this situation (dropping out of an accepted offer), what outcome would you have wanted? The person in question resigning themselves to working with you and being miserable so that they didn't go back on their word? I don't see the positive in having a disengaged employee who's only with your company out of obligation.
Daishiman 4y ago
> For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. If you were to do that it says more about you than the person in question and would not look positively on you.
seattle_spring 4y ago
> And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you With an attitude like that, I guarantee that you've burned plenty of bridges yourself.

l33t2328 4y ago

> God forbid you live in the Bay Area, and you and I perhaps cross paths at a party, Burning Man, or any other event What, you’ll be so personally slighted that this person made a business decision that you’ll ensure to disrupt everyone else’s time at burning man/a party/ any other event?

hn_neverguess 4y ago
I like how you minimize the ethical implications by calling it a business decision. I do agree that screwing over a family member is different than screwing over a colleague, but let's also agree that both are bad. And what appears to be a "business decision" could be a serious setback for the person on the other side of this transaction. Granted, as a startup founder, I am more exposed than someone at FAANG, but don't fool yourself - either way, someone wasted a lot of time and money on giving you a shot, and more importantly, they declined all other candidates. It really is such a selfish thing to do, and while sometimes you have no choice (health, etc), I didn't get the feeling from the OP that he felt particularly bad about it. So to get back to your original question - no, I wouldn't give you a pass because you showed your dirty side in a business context. And if I thought you were dishonest, I would assume that your dishonesty extends across all facets of your life, and I would think I'd be doing my friends a favor by letting them know.
- scarface74 4y ago
  I hate to be blunt. But as a startup founder, you probably don’t matter to many of the posters on HN. Most startup founders pay below what we could get at a public company and all you could offer is “equity” that would be statistically worthless.
  - hn_neverguess 4y ago
    No need to apologize - what you're sharing is the accepted truism. And yes, it makes it hard to compete for the same talent that's also considering FAANG. I will be even more blunt - yes, you're likely to retire sooner if you took a FAANG job. But there are three caveats: 1. That last statement is only true because most of the people who start or join a startup don't see a material increase in the value of their equity. But a little known secret in the startup world is that you only have to be right once. It doesn't matter one tiny bit if your previous 5 startups failed, if the 6th one ends up finding the product market fit. My batting average is pretty poor, and even so I am way ahead of anyone I grew up with. You only have to be right once. 2. People think of startup success as this all or nothing thing, where you're either super poor or super rich. In reality, if you give it your best and do a decent job, even if you end up failing you'll be getting calls from people who you would have never met in any other way. For example, I failed with a startup about 10 years ago and ended up at Square only because of that exact same failure. There's no way in hell it would have happened any other way. 3. Most startups are run by first-time founders, and most first-time founders are still early in their learning process. A direct consequence of that is that they are cheap. But every once in a while you come across someone who's had one or two big exits, and I guarantee you that they are thinking differently about comp. In PG's words, Apple could have given Steve Jobs 95% of their equity to lure him back, and it still would have been a great deal for them. Experienced startup founders know that, and they have levers that FAANG doesn't. There are two senior people in my current startup that I poached directly out of FAANG.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      1. "You only have to be right once"... out of how many times? 1/6? 1/10? Much worse? This caveat is nothing but an ad for lottery tickets. 2. Sure, startups are a fine place to hone your talents, show your worth, and network. Same as any other type of workplace. Who's to say you wouldn't have met someone else at a big company who could've gotten you into Square? 3. For every serial entrepreneur who truly has a knack for it and truly learned along the way, there are those who are persisting in error. You're combining your first and second caveats here, describing the possibility of networking one's way into working for a quality experienced founder who will be your lottery ticket. Nothing wrong with startups, but this is just another set of hoary old truisms more optimistic than the previous one.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

TechD00d 4y ago

I recommend NOT attempting malicious demolition of the careers of others; it’s not only unethical but it also can land one in a massive heap of legal trouble. Attorneys love actions like those active career sabotage “revenge” tactics you’re describing, and sooner or later, someone employing them will learn the hard way. If they’re lucky and get smarter, they’ll end up just having to write a public letter of apology they share with the world (including those they defamed the former employee to). It will have a negative impact on their own career and probably sink their chances of ever raising money again. If they’re less lucky or unwilling to address an attorney’s letter, they’ll end up having to pay a fat seven figure settlement, attorney’s fees, and a letter of apology. VCs will be most unimpressed. And in some cases, if they’re willing enough to go to court, they’ll be facing having their communications subpoenaed, their professional network subpoenaed and deposed about the comments, and will end up with a seven or eight figure judgment including punitive damages. VCs won’t even reply to their communications, and anyone deposed will associate the angry would-be saboteur with legal trouble.

dudul 4y ago

> For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. Well, see, I don't even need to work with you to know I wouldn't enjoy it :). Spiteful much? And guess what, I bet the tech industry is big enough that it will never happen, so cheers.

hn_neverguess 4y ago
I could respond with something equally snarky, but that would detract from the point I am trying to make. I would recommend you reread my message and try not to take it personally but instead ask yourself if there's a chance that the tech industry is not as big as you make it out to be. I'll give you two things to think about: 1. Most people never gain any amount of visibility in their lives, and that's fine. But why prevent that from at least being a possibility? What if it turns out that you have something interesting to say and there's a ton of people who want to hear it (eg: you become a VC or an expert in something). Not being able to benefit from having a personal brand should the opportunity present itself would be a hell of a bummer. You'll notice that I am being very careful with my own identity when giving unpopular feedback. 2. Sure, in 2022 it would be hard for a startup in Iowa to learn that you screwed someone over in Florida. But do you really want to bet that the same will be true in 2042? In the last 20 years, we went from no social graph at all to a social graph in every slice of our lives. What are the odds that in the next 20 years we won't see continued progress towards transparency and accountability? Reputations have never mattered more, and will only do more so in the future.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  Orthogonal to this entire debate on employee conduct, what you call "transparency and accountability" is synonymous with social surveillance and the erosion of privacy. Instead of a state-mandated social credit system, you're describing societal norms giving way to an ad hoc total information awareness as pushed by social media websites and search engines, public record indexing companies and grassroots doxxers. Let us pray in twenty years more countries will enshrine the right to be forgotten.

doctor_eval 4y ago

burning man?

hn_neverguess 4y ago
I met more tech friends at burning man than any other place outside my workplaces.
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  I don’t really want to engage but this is really bugging me. Now, I haven’t been to burning man, but I’ve been to plenty of bush doofs, and if I bumped into someone who’d ghosted me for a job I’d be like; man, what happened? you really missed out. How ‘bout a hug? There are better ways to deal with adversity in the world than to go on the attack and threaten people’s livelihoods. Even if their decision impacted you adversely, it doesn’t give you the right to fuck someone over in retaliation.

scarface74 4y ago

Your statement sounds much like the old “if you get caught doing $x at school it will go on your permanent record”. BigTech is so vast that unless you do something egregious it’s hard not to get hired back at the same one, let alone a competitor. For every you that wouldn’t hire the parent posters, there are hundreds of managers that will. No part of the hiring loop at major tech companies for ICs that I am aware of involves checking references. We definitely don’t do that as part of the loop. Our entire hiring process is based on how well you do in the interview.

hn_neverguess 4y ago
Elsewhere in this thread I pointed out that you would want to future proof your actions for the rest of your career. I wouldn't bet on the visibility of my actions being the same today as it will be in 20 years from now.
- scarface74 4y ago
  I’m 48 and I’ve been in the industry since I was 22. I’ve worked in companies with 10 people all the way to second largest employer in the country. In 20 years if I’m still having to work, I need to rethink my life choices. That being said, especially with the acceleration of remote work (I live on the opposite coast) Opportunities are vast.

mynameisvlad 4y ago

> For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. Do you have a "burn book" of people who have wronged you or something? How would you even realize it's the same person a decade down the line? Why would you even care?

hn_neverguess 4y ago
Sure, if you couldn't care less about your job, then why care about anyone else screwing you over in your job? But let's see if the inverse is true as well. If you deeply deeply deeply cared about your job (eg: it's your startup and you have exactly 12 months of runway, but it takes 4 months to source, vet, hire and onboard someone), would it matter to you that someone cheated you out of a third of your runway? The truth is likely somewhere in the middle. That should answer why someone who is likely to reasonable care about their job and would likely experience a serious setback in their work would be really upset about the OP's actions.
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  I doubt that anyone, even someone as extreme as your example, would care enough about it a decade after it happened. More egregious things would have happened in the meantime.
  - hn_neverguess 4y ago
    Extending a job offer to someone means you met with them on multiple occasions, remotely and in person. I know I am not going to forget their face in 10 years. Would I feel a bit less wronged about them after 10 years? Of course. Would I lie in a backchannel reference? No.
    - mynameisvlad 4y ago
      I doubt your memory and vengeance is nearly as crazy a decade since any event (however wronged by it you may perceive yourself to be) -- let alone something as incredibly benign as someone rescinding an offer. In short, while you say that now, I highly doubt it actually would be the case were this hypothetical a reality. You'd have to be incredibly thin-skinned and vengeful to carry this much weight to something so minor.

geoka9 4y ago

I get your point, but if, after extending an offer (and having it accepted) you suddenly found out the role has been "made redundant", would go out of your way to get your executive compensation reduced so that the new hire could stay and you wouldn't have to "burn bridges" with the person? I'm not taking sides here, but am curious to see your argument.

hn_neverguess 4y ago
I've been a startup founder for the last 20 years, and the short answer is yes. I did exactly that same thing in 2020 to help onboard someone in February who we otherwise wouldn't have been able to keep. Our board asked for a hiring freeze, and I pushed through a candidate by cutting my salary by 50% (I would have done it anyway out of principle, but that's a different story). I know a lot of other startup CEOs who lowered their salaries to help extend their runways.
- User23 4y ago
  That's rational. If a startup CEO is motivated by salary rather than equity, that's terrible for everyone involved, from the investors on down to the early employees.

aghtk 4y ago

hn_neverguess 4y ago
I would be ok with just "honest."

ipaddr 4y ago

As someone with more than 20 years experience.. I always feared what you mentioned but your post made me question that fear. Small companies may hold it against you and you may never have a chance to work their again but what are the odds they have a matching role and would you ever apply again. The industry keeps getting bigger. I have never run into anyone I ever worked with in any other company. I don't think it really matters. The chances of seeing someone at a party or burning man or a ghost reference (they want your opinion on someone you never worked with?) is literally 0. If you told everyone/everywhere it would make people question you.. why doesn't this great candidate (you wanted to hire them) decide to back out. What is wrong with this manager/team.. bonus is if you are successful impacting their career they can personally sue and take everything you own.

hn_neverguess 4y ago
[dead]
- ipaddr 4y ago
  For most social media I go under a different name and never invite people I work with. For something like linkedin over the years the number of connections reaches thousands and any mutual connection will be connected to 2nd, 3rd headhunters. Trying to find the back channel person would be like whack a mole. If I work with 100-300 people over a 5 years period the number of new companies would be in the 10,000+ range. The growth has been crazy. Those reference checks target companies on your resume not positions you didn't accept. This is happening more often because of long hiring cycles where candidates invest so much time in multiple rounds that offers and deadlines often do not align. I use to be able to target one company and find out quickly (one interview, maybe a test) if there was an offer. It literally takes 4-8 rounds where any one round can knock you out. Having said that I've never pulled my acceptance. Once time I quit after the first day.. One small room that was so crowded it wasn't going to work (the interview happened elsewhere). The first few months are a trial for both parties.

erosenbe0 4y ago

I hope you're stance assumes you know why the candidate reversed. If you don't know for a fact that it was a cynical or frivolous ploy, then it can't have much bearing on their reputation. Perhaps they accepted the offer, closed their search, and something came up. Perhaps a bad thing, such as cancer or rehab or mental care, or a neutral thing like their military spouse was transferred.

hn_neverguess 4y ago
The OP made it sound like it's not a big deal to do what he did. My reaction is based on that context.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

ryanbrunner 4y ago

Ask yourself honestly, in this situation (dropping out of an accepted offer), what outcome would you have wanted? The person in question resigning themselves to working with you and being miserable so that they didn't go back on their word? I don't see the positive in having a disengaged employee who's only with your company out of obligation.

Daishiman 4y ago

> For comparison, I would have never ever reached out to you again. And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you. If you were to do that it says more about you than the person in question and would not look positively on you.

seattle_spring 4y ago

> And if I met you in the hallway at some other place, I would have made sure that everyone knows how I feel about you With an attitude like that, I guarantee that you've burned plenty of bridges yourself.