Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The only universal truth when it comes to interviews is that there are no universal truths.

As an interviewee there is nothing you can do that will universally be read as a positive across all interviewers. There are so many contradictory rules among interviewers that you might as well not bother gaming the system and do what you want to do. Let the chips fall as they may.

As an interviewer, no filter you put in place will give you a perfect read on what it's intended to test. For instance I know I have my quirks in terms of things that'll turn me off of a candidate based on resume alone. But I also recognize that many candidates are coached to do it this way in the first place. So I need to be conscious of this and try to not interpret these things as "shitty candidate"




>The only universal truth when it comes to interviews is that there are no universal truths.

100%. This is what makes me roll my eyes in all of these threads. Do enough interviews and you'll see people regularly dismissed for the most pretty and inane reasons. Hell, just the other day in one of these threads you had someone saying that they rejected a candidate because they said "bro" too much. No amount of interview prep, "They Hate This One Weird Trick" blogs, or hiring astrology will beat the fact that there are humans sitting on the other side of the table. And humans are weird and finicky


>they rejected a candidate because they said "bro" too much

It would depend on context but that would certainly trip alarm bells for me.


Case in point, tbh




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: