Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 426 posts

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#341

Post by mixmastamyk »

pmiller2 wrote: post #335
taneq wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We always get these kinds of responses when interview testing is mentioned. This isn't some high-level algorithm analysis on a whiteboard with a panel of examiners grilling you. This is a simple test of basic competence. It's like interviewing a candidate Formula 1 driver and asking them "so which bit's the brake pedal?" If they can't tell you that instantly then they shouldn't be applying for the position in the fir…

I don’t think I’ve ever been asked a “which is the brake pedal” level question in an onsite interview. Usually it’s more like I’m a mechanic being asked “how do you replace the water pump on a 1999 Saturn Ion, from memory, please.”

Maybe as the first "smalltalk" question you'll get a brake pedal, but yes your Saturn-type question will be the "make or break."

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#342

Post by sunstone »

Hmmm, so on standardised tests I typically score in the top two percentile. (yes I'm fabulous). But the best developer I ever worked with was a Russian guy who interviewed terribly. He was great at code, he was even great as a team lead. But he sucked at interviews. I never interviewed him so I can't say why that is but...if there's more than a few of these guys out there, there's room for (major) improvement in the interview business.

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#343

Post by SmellTheGlove »

fogetti wrote: post #323
btilly wrote: post #141

I believe that the article is fundamentally wrong. The bulk of the article is true. But companies are not lying when they say that legal risk is a reason not to send feedback. Triplebyte is in the unusual position of being able to say, "Everyone who has enough technical skill gets through the interview." And that fact is sufficient to defuse their risk. But real companies don't have the luxury of ignoring non-technic…

I am wondering why are the technical interviews are put before the personal interviews then? If none of the technical skills matter in light of the soft skills because some candidate has a hair color or accent which bothers a team member, why bother with checking technicality in the first place?

Depends on what you want to optimize for. It may be that the technical filter is the finer one, so start there and have fewer in the second round. It could also be that technical is more important, as no amount of soft skills substitute for technical ability in some roles. Also keep in mind that we're usually evaluating soft skills as a single dimension, or sometimes even just a byproduct, in what is actually a broader behavioral interview.

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#344

Post by SilasX »

dep_b wrote: post #14

Getting rejected at Triplebyte was actually a pretty good investment time wise. Guess the whole thing costed me three hours in total and I got quite a list of things to improve and how. It was clear it was tailored towards the interview not just a larger generic mail. There are tons of companies that give you a generic email after you completed an IQ test, a questionary, open questions and of course the 8hours+ homew…

I did the project (back when that was an option on TripleByte) and failed it. They said I could still try the pure technical interview option, but then ignored me when I asked for that (albeit more than a year later).

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#345

Post by nosseo »

SilasX wrote: post #344
dep_b wrote: post #14

Getting rejected at Triplebyte was actually a pretty good investment time wise. Guess the whole thing costed me three hours in total and I got quite a list of things to improve and how. It was clear it was tailored towards the interview not just a larger generic mail. There are tons of companies that give you a generic email after you completed an IQ test, a questionary, open questions and of course the 8hours+ homew…

I did the project (back when that was an option on TripleByte) and failed it. They said I could still try the pure technical interview option, but then ignored me when I asked for that (albeit more than a year later).

Even a year later, you should definitely have had the chance to try again if you'd like. I can reactivate your account; email me at kelsey@triplebyte.com

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#346

Post by nosseo »

mehrdadn wrote: post #178
nosseo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For arrogant, I'd try to make the feedback as concrete and specific as possible - "sometimes you gave confidently wrong answers. If you're guessing, it's better to tell your interviewer that. Interviewers typically won't hold it against you if you guess and guess rightly, but if you don't acknowledge you're guessing and get things wrong, it raises questions about whether you know what you don't know." or "sometimes i…

The thing is you still reduced arrogance to technical correctness. However, what I was trying to get at was, what about cases where the technical correctness is just fine? If it's their attitude or hygiene or something else that you don't like, how do you tell them that? I was trying to get at the same thing you just said, which is that, like you, most people would become uncomfortable providing feedback on at least…

So the thing is, I think arrogance is typically reflected in actual deficiencies in interview performance. If it isn't - if it's just a vibe that the interviewer got with no concrete implications for how they work with others, solve problems, or communicate - then I worry taking it into account is introducing bias. If I can't think of a concrete implication that the arrogance had, then I don't think I want to take it into account. (You almost always can identify concrete effects, though.)

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#347

Post by sfink »

drngdds wrote: post #310
btilly wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion as someone present, this standard was met. (1) Programmers need to be able to communicate about what they did, what they need to do, and how things are designed. (2) Interviewers kept on saying things like, "I managed to pick out enough of the right words that he probably answered me, but I wasn't sure." None of us cared that he had an accent - we hired plenty of people with accents. We cared that we co…

>Interviewers kept on saying things like, "I managed to pick out enough of the right words that he probably answered me, but I wasn't sure." Did it ever occur to them to ask "Sorry, could you repeat that?" Sometimes it takes a bit more effort to understand someone, whether it's because of an accent or a speech disorder or whatever. As an interviewer, you're in a position of power, and you have an obligation to put in…

Have you really never been in this situation. I have, several times. Yes, of course i ask the candidate to repeat what they said. And again when i don't get that. And again. Varying my question a little too see if they'll say it differently. I'll go about 5 times before giving up and either moving on to another topic in the desperate hope that it's the specific words that are the problem, or switching to a chat channel or something. I really really don't want to lose the chance to evaluate the candidate in other relevant areas, just in case I'm the only one who can't make out the accent. (Which has never happened so far, since due to my circle of friends I'm well above average at deciphering accents.)

But even if i do successfully communicate with such a candidate enough to evaluate them technically, i will most certainly bring it up during the debrief. To not do so would be dishonest and unprofessional; i cannot make a call that it would be ok to hire this individual under an assumption that all communication will be written or whatever.

Also, it is very probable that i will have only managed to make it through a small fraction of my intended questions in such a situation.

(I have to say that your assumption seems unwarranted that the previous poster was simply not bothering to ask them to repeat themselves.)

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#348

Post by slg »

simsla wrote: post #277
slg wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the more likely that someone will crunch it and find some statistical patterns that they will label “racism” or "sexism". Even if you’re innocent The existence of that pattern by itself might be enough for a company to be guilty of discrimination. If a policy disproportionately harms a specific protected class and they can't show a legitimate business reason for that policy, it is illegal regardless of intent. It is…

No. Any data exhibits random patterns, especially if you try too hard. If you check for 10 patterns, each at the 95% significance level (p That's why science requires you to formulate a hypothesis before running the experiment. And why finding a pattern through data analysis does not warrant a witch hunt.

I don't know what to tell you. It isn't my opinion. It is the law. [1] You can't just saw "No." and be done with it.

It also isn't about setting up a witch hunt. It is about protecting people from discriminatory practices even when the discrimination is neither overt or even intentional.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#349

Post by dhnsmakala »

btilly wrote: post #141

I believe that the article is fundamentally wrong. The bulk of the article is true. But companies are not lying when they say that legal risk is a reason not to send feedback. Triplebyte is in the unusual position of being able to say, "Everyone who has enough technical skill gets through the interview." And that fact is sufficient to defuse their risk. But real companies don't have the luxury of ignoring non-technic…

Honestly, the fireworks guy seems pretty fun.

Curious what the lunch argument was too

Re: I know why rejection emails suck – I write them

#350

Post by ddebernardy »

tptacek wrote: post #171
ddebernardy wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you asking questions about relational databases? Why not just have candidates accomplish the thing you're assessing with an actual relational database? It's not the same thing. Browse around the various SQL tags in StackOverflow and you'll see plenty of candidates who can "accomplish" things using relational databases yet have positively no idea of how they work. When shit hits the fan they're asking strang…

Are you trying to say that there's some technical detail about solving a problem with an RDBMS that can only be expressed in an interview question? I call "shenanigans" on that. If the most obvious challenges are too easy for candidates to solve, so that they can just copy the answer from Stack Overflow, come up with better questions.

Not saying that at all. Merely that a mere of understanding of a few basics, such as how indexes work and when to use one, goes a long way towards being more effective at interacting with a database.

"Here's some schema information. This complicated query meant to do X is running too slowly. Can you recommend ways to speed things up and explain your reasoning?"

Post reply on HN