Hacker News Reader

> Both parties could have handled this better.

Bullshit. Kelly was a complete a-hole and deserves everything she gets. There were 100 different ways to handle this without insults.

I don't even treat telemarketers this rudely.

Looks like this isn't the popular opinion on HN right now, but I fully agree.

"And deserves everything she gets"

Yes, let's ruin a woman's livelihood over a bloody LinkedIn exchange because somebody's feelings were hurt.

The only thing that happened to her was that her email (multiple similarly worded emails, in fact) was posted publicly. If that's all it takes to ruin her career than maybe she shouldn't have written the email the way she did.

And what was the purpose of posting the email?

To punish and embarrass. Careers have been ruined in such a manner.

The point is that posting the email wouldn't have been a punishment if she would have responded in a socially acceptable manner. She brought it on herself.

When I skim-read that I thought you were referring to Kelly's "Good luck with the other jobs board. Oh, wait, there isn't one" comment.

Hey, the NFL forgave Michael Vick. Anything is possible.

> The individual who was on the receiving end of the LinkedIn request is right

Yeah... No.

Don't run a fucking job board and pimp it through LinkedIn if you don't want attention. The request could have just been ignored, and it did NOT deserve this vitriol.

First, you're ignoring the fact that the woman specifically runs a listserv for people looking for work. That's what the woman DOES. She helps people find jobs (supposedly). If what you do is help people find jobs, do not be surprised when people without jobs come looking to you for help with finding a job. It's like running a soup kitchen and going "What's with all these homeless people asking me for food?!"

Second, what is it with people and the "almighty linkedin connections" thing? Do you or anyone else really think your "960+ connections" are some kind of treasure hoard that needs to be guarded by Smaug and kept safe from the undeserving? Protip: they're not.

The issue here is that the woman's response was petty. She could have just denied the connection on linkedin and then made sure the requester provided all the required information to join the mailing list. Instead, she just blanket denies her from the mailing list with the intent of never letting her join because she had the audacity to ask for a linkedin connection.

And, yes, people who are too full of themselves and hyped up on their own "importance" deserve to be knocked down a peg, which is what happened to this woman. Especially considering that this isn't the first time she's sent this kind of response back to someone.

Without public exposure, she would have never been taught a lesson she desperately needed to learn - that you can't just shit on people because you think you're more important than them.

First, you're ignoring the fact that the woman specifically runs a listserv for people looking for work. That's what the woman DOES.

You're right I'm ignoring it. Because I don't take issue with how she responded, but rather with the "sticks and stones may break my bones, but if you hurt my feelings when you reject my request, I WILL DESTROY YOU IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION" approach the requestor went with, and how that approach has been supported by the bloodthirsty mob.

Second, what is it with people and the "almighty linkedin connections" thing?

It's their choice, is it not?

The requester was cordial, if persistent. The response was condescending, rude, insensitive... and the pejoratives are essentially unending. Even "Your invite to connect is inappropriate, beneficial only to you, and tacky", is egregiously presumptuous. I really hope that's not your attitude towards people doing what they can to find a job, MrZongle.

By default, I don't have a problem with anybody trying to find a job...especially in this economy. Networking can be a powerful tool, and I can respect that.

But let's not lose sight of what a LinkedIn connection also entails: it means that all of your other connections are now visible to each other, and to some people that may imply a degree of exclusivity. To some, LinkedIn is not a contact-free-for-all like Facebook, where one can be "friended" casually.

A LinkedIn connection isn't like walking into a business and cold-calling on an owner or manager. It's the equivalent of walking in and demanding to see their address book of contacts.

Others in this thread have indicated that the best response would have been to ignore the request. I agree. But some people don't work like that, which is why I referenced a truncated response perhaps would have been ok.

Yes, the response was rude and insensitive....and so is the entire world outside of the comfy confines of white-collar America. The requestor made certain assumptions she should not have, and her follow-up approach to the situation seems to imply a sense of entitlement.

Whether you are aware of what a LinkedIn connection supposedly entails or not doesn't change the fact that her email (described as "venomous" in another article, and I don't disagree) was extremely unprofessional and just frankly out of place.

But why should we assume that everyone is aware of how supposedly "exclusive" a LinkedIn connection is? I for one was not. (I stopped using LinkedIn shortly after their security mishaps a few years back.) If the requester only had a few contacts it's reasonable to assume she was new to the site and did not realize this either. That's no reason to have such an acerbic response shot back at her.

> Yes, the response was rude and insensitive....and so is the entire world

I for one don't tolerate rudeness or insensitivity in either my personal or business life (on either my part or that of others). I guess that's just me.

I for one don't tolerate rudeness or insensitivity in either my personal or business life (on either my part or that of others). I guess that's just me.

Despite our sparring in this thread, I don't think we're miles apart on this issue. As I've gotten older (I'm in my early 40s), I've become less and less tolerant of rudeness, drama, and insensitivity.

But what spurred me to post was not the original rude reply, but the witch hunt that has arisen around it. This macks of a temper tantrum by a hypersensitive person who has whipped the online mob (who simply want to see a good fight) into a frenzy.

If I would have received that kind of response, I likely would have responded with a few choice words of my own. Then again, I wouldn't have made the request in the first place without at least engaging the person in some other, more social manner.

I see the response as just as offensive as the original rejection. What could have been an interesting anecdote and useful starting point for a discussion on civility was quickly turned into a vendetta when anonymity was thrown out the window.

There is a security setting in LinkedIn to hide your contacts from everyone but yourself...

Yes, but it it an all-or-nothing affair?

If I've got several hundred connections, do I want to hide them all from my other contacts?

Some may see that being a bit more exclusive in connecting may be the best solution.

The better solution is that you can change the settings about who can send you connection requests since this "senior professional" feels that they're such an affront when received from strangers

The recipient of this email responded in the comments of the post, and she sounds pretty genuine. People have preached LinkedIn to us 20-somethings since we started the job hunt junior year of university. This woman literally offers her network as a service to people, is it really that out of hand to assume that asking her to connect on LinkedIn would be a big deal. After all, she had just applied to be a part of this job board.

Now, I think that the actual message of the response is fine. If you don't connect with people you don't know, that's fine. You can say as much, but going off a rant is just a waste of bits.

I don't see what the big deal is. Maybe it's a generation gap? I'm in my 20s as well and it's never a big deal to send a request to someone on a social networking site.

I understand how it would be inappropriate if I tried to connect with Larry Page or something, but he isn't running a job database intended to help me.

I'm really put off by the attitude that some people have toward professional networking. I hope that if I ever become highly respected for my work, young people aren't afraid to reach out to me. If don't have time to help them or respond, I wont, but I'll never tell anyone "Never e-mail me again! How dare you, inexperienced little peasant, attempt to further your career by reaching out to a massively successful senior professional like myself!".

I'm really put off by the attitude that some people have toward professional networking. I hope that if I ever become highly respected for my work, young people aren't afraid to reach out to me.

Same here. I'm a big believer in the idea that pretty much everybody has "something to offer" and that we can all learn from everybody else. I accept almost all the LI connections I receive, with only a few exceptions (blatant SPAM, obvious fake profiles, etc.)

Being in my 40's and having worked in my field for sometime, I actually enjoy opportunities to "give back" a bit and help younger people. I wish everybody took that kind of approach, but what can ya do?

"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - Generally attributed to Malcolm S. Forbes.

Were he alive today, Forbes would be condemned as a corrupt 1%er for his extravagant lifestyle and wealth.

The 20-something got backhanded

Yep, and this should never happen in a professional setting when your job is dealing with the public.

Just ignore the request and move on though. Certainly less energy than spewing an angry message.

Site is Down Cached Version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?output=search&s...

> Much ado about nothing. The individual who was on the receiving end of the LinkedIn request is right, even if her response to the 20-something went overboard. If she had stopped at "Your invite to connect is inappropriate, beneficial only to you, and tacky" we wouldn't have even known about it.

Perhaps, but we're hearing about this because she very much didn't stop there.

Perhaps, but we're hearing about this because she very much didn't stop there.

Yes, but let's not forget: we're also hearing about this because the offended party decided to make a spectacle out of this, with the sole intention of hurting the other.

Both parties are in the wrong, but I take issue with how the Internet mob is clamoring for blood after being intentionally riled up over hurting somebody's feelings.

You'd think it's on par with oil spills, drone strikes and Constitutional violations.

The funny thing is, to me the 20 something does come of feeling entitled, after posting this personal message everywhere because she did not get here way.

Now obviously the original lady was a rude, but so what? Somehow being rude to someone is grounds for public evisceration these days? Of course being publicly humiliated is way worse than being rude to someone.

All that happened is that her own words got posted publicly. Any humiliation that occurred was solely of her own doing.

Not quite. Her own words were copied and pasted by the offended party and willfully distributed.

This isn't the case of one person being an a-hole to another in public in front of witnesses who could repeat the affair and shame the offending party: it's a case where the offended person chose to make it personal and punish the other.

> it's a case where the offended person chose to make it personal and punish the other.

How exactly did the offended person punish her? By revealing to the world the true nature of KB?

I haven't seen the original post that the girl sent, so how can we even judge her?

And I don't expect my private message to become public, do you? Of course, messaging an unknown like that, you have to be more careful.

Maybe she just had a bad day, the message came at a bad time.

If she had stopped at "Your invite to connect is inappropriate, beneficial only to you, and tacky" we wouldn't have even known about it.

Do you actually use LinkedIn? You seem to be assigning a connection with some sort of profound meaning that it simply doesn't have. Indeed, if you follow LinkedIn's standard user flow, it will generate connection invites for anyone who you've ever corresponded with and saved as a contact on your email platform. If you get invites that you don't want to reciprocate, you ignore them.

And isn't it glorious irony that someone in the business of networking complains about someone trying to network?

Add that LinkedIn allows you to restrict who can even send you invites (which this woman didn't use), and who can see your connections (which is apparently the grave concern here).

Sorry, this woman was obviously having a very bad day, with a strange hint that they may feel threatened by youth, and decided to explode on a stranger -- in a very inappropriate and tacky way. There is nothing "right" about their action.

Yes, to answer your question, I do use LinkedIn. But I am picky about who I network with, because I feel that my connections also reflect upon me. If I wanted to do otherwise, I'd use Facebook.

The response from the woman in question went too far, and it isn't too hard to draw the conclusion that she probably shouldn't be in a job involving networking if she has that reaction.... but it doesn't change the fact that the connection requestor was looking to get something for nothing, and her subsequent activity to mob-shame the other is equally disgusting.

Actually, as far as I've read, both connection requestors who received this type of treatment tried to add her so that she could see their profiles. The data they sent to join the job board is fairly limited (doesn't include a resume) so both individuals felt that allowing her to see their profiles could be beneficial, not trying to "farm" this woman's connections for jobs. They're trying to join the job board to find jobs.

If a job board exists in a forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

This woman apparently has influence and persuasion because of her membership. By trying to connect, this young woman was saying "you are important and I want to connect with you". That is a two way street, and it is not fair to say "something for nothing".

As to the public shaming, we are all accountable for our words and actions, particularly when we engage in discriminatory behaviors (the whole bitter "your generation" bit). There is nothing disgusting about this so-called public shaming (note that it was in result of someone engaging in ageism and then basically declaring the person shut out, celebrating their monopoly).

The Job Board operator could have simply hid their connections if they really feel a great burden for a connection invite, and their grievous fear that everyone was trying to usurp their network (again, we come to the "Feeling threatened" bit) would be allayed.