Seems like overkill? Toying with recruiters or improving productivity by avoiding seeing the spam in the first place? I don’t get many so it doesn’t bother me…
Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
11–20 of 111 posts
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#12In LinkedIn I have my first name as my first name + middle initial.
I always know when is a mass message or a real personalized message based on whether or not they include that initial.
Works surprisingly well for me but sadly for LinkedIn that’s a case of an implementation detail totally destroying their value proposition for recruiters.
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#13I used to do something similar a couple of years ago, but ultimately, the bot replies became so short it made no sense to pay AWS to run the code.
The last version of the code, which I kept running for over 6+ months, continued replying with things like “Thanks . I’m interested.” —or— “Thanks . I’m not interested, but I appreciate the invitation.” After comparing the success rate of my interviews with the length of my initial replies, I realized that short messages resulted in better leads.
I dare to say that it never matters if the recruiter is targeting you specifically or bombarding a long list of potential employees. They only need to know if you are interested or not, so writing long emails to accept or decline their invitations is usually a waste of time, for you and for them. If you are interested, say so, and they will quickly set up a pre-screening call to tell you more about the company, the role, the team, compensation package, or whatever you want to know.
If you are not interested, most recruiters will appreciate a simple “not interested. thanks.” and move on.
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#14There's a much simpler way to identify recruiter spam: put this in your profile: “Please include the word ‘banana’ in your message.”
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#15I used to do something similar a couple of years ago, but ultimately, the bot replies became so short it made no sense to pay AWS to run the code. The last version of the code, which I kept running for over 6+ months, continued replying with things like “Thanks . I’m interested.” —or— “Thanks . I’m not interested, but I appreciate the invitation.” After comparing the success rate of my interviews with the length of m…
Actually when I wanted to change teams I cold emailed managers of other teams at my company. I found the same thing: a short 3 line emails have a great response rate.
If you send a message that is too long, you just increase the barrier of responding.
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#16Using Naive Bayes for text classification problems such as spam detection is fine for teaching purposes but:
-it doesn't understand context
-if the spammer uses related words, good luck catching those
-false positives can be quite high
As a recruiter receiving such a wonderful automated reply from you, I would ask you why didn't you use a more suited technique to the problem such as transformer-based attention network, or at least deep learning neural network.
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#17One recruiter was pestering me, and I was ignoring his emails... then he sent this which made me laugh:
> I can do this all day - it's quite literally my job :)
>
> Really though, we are highly interested in your background ...
>
> Chat soon?Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#18Seems like overkill? Toying with recruiters or improving productivity by avoiding seeing the spam in the first place? I don’t get many so it doesn’t bother me…
> I don’t get many so it doesn’t bother me…
Lucky you. I get 300+ emails per day and 15-30 phone calls. As a result, I created very aggressive email filters (hundreds of domains go straight to trash) and phone configuration (non-contacts go straight to voicemail and hundreds of numbers are blocked).
Now I only see emails or calls from recruiters in the single-digits per day (and I add them to block lists too).
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#19In LinkedIn I have my first name as my first name + middle initial. I always know when is a mass message or a real personalized message based on whether or not they include that initial. Works surprisingly well for me but sadly for LinkedIn that’s a case of an implementation detail totally destroying their value proposition for recruiters.
Some recruiters may think that you want your initial to be included. I’ve seen multiple posts talking about purposefully ignoring communication when there are small spelling mistakes in their names. Missing a whole initial may be one of those red flags for some.
Re: Automatically detecting and replying to recruiter spam
#20I used to do something similar a couple of years ago, but ultimately, the bot replies became so short it made no sense to pay AWS to run the code. The last version of the code, which I kept running for over 6+ months, continued replying with things like “Thanks . I’m interested.” —or— “Thanks . I’m not interested, but I appreciate the invitation.” After comparing the success rate of my interviews with the length of m…
I’m assuming the original poster is not really looking for a new job, but is open to the opportunity if it comes with sufficient upside. So missing on a few opportunities may be an acceptable risk for them.