this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
283 points (97.3% liked)
LinkedinLunatics
5890 readers
14 users here now
A place to post ridiculous posts from linkedIn.com
(Full transparency.. a mod for this sub happens to work there.. but that doesn't influence his moderation or laughter at a lot of posts.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He had a pretty reasonable response to the backlash, at least.
Honestly more people in high positions need a vibe check every now and then. Rich and powerful people become so insulated and surrounded by yes-men they think their ideas are infallible. As negative as social media is, one of the nice things is it levels the playing field a bit and gets that brutal feedback straight to them.
(Granted the truly narcissistic and arrogant will just brush it off, but for some, it’ll cause them to reflect)
I'm largely convinced that lack of vibe checking is why the particularly powerful and particularly powerless seem to lose their minds in the same way. You're about equally likely to convince the ceo and the homeless guy out front that what they're saying is completely untethered from reality, and they're similarly likely to make you regret trying.
Doesn't change anything. His initial tirade shows what kind of self absorbed piece of shit he is. Everyone's been inundated with spam calls for decades now. He'd have to have been living under a rock to not understand that. To expect people to just answer an unknown number, or call back when you don't leave a voice mail saying who the fuck you are and what you want is asinine. But no, HE'S special and if you don't answer HIS calls your a bad candidate.
Less shocking than usual. The rest of his post was pretty on point tbh. If anyone could acknowledge their faults, it's someone that hires the whole person.
Nothing screams "hires the whole person" like dismissing candidates for arbitrary reasons like being too busy to answer the phone.
I've been in so many corporate jobs where they dismiss candidates because they couldnt solve brain teasers or explain what they would put in a ultimate burrito. I shit you not.
Counterpoint. If you give someone your phone number, you shouldn't be shocked if they try to call it.
Nobody mentioned being shocked; your "counterpoint" is countering a point nobody made. You don't have to be shocked to be busy or avoid answering unknown numbers, ( which is the norm now )
It's expected that a caller with a legitimate professional purpose would leave a message. Has been since the answering machine came around. This isn't some sort of novel wholistic approach to someone's personally, it's a specific, arbitrary filter to find people who don't follow normal telephone interaction behaviors.
If you are not going to answer unknown numbers, don't give your number to unknown people.
This is basic logic. Nothing to do with imaginary "normal telephone interaction behaviors".
This is insane. Why wouldn't they leave a voice mail? Why do you expect people to be available at all times?
For example, what if I'm in the middle of a bike ride when this person calls back? Or driving? In the shower? Taking a dump? In a sensitive conversation? On the phone with someone else?
This is the whole point of voice mail. There are plenty of reasons people might not answer the phone, even before the "spam call" issue comes into play.
Your "basic logic" is extremely flawed.
The argument is not about availability. It's about answering calls from (listening to messages from, calling back to) unknown numbers.
No, the original argument was about not even leaving a voice mail, just expecting someone is going to answer their phone every time it rings regardless of the situation.
So I understand you've literally never picked up a cellphone. Do you know what they look like?
I take it you often give random people your number then never answer your phone.
I don't. And yet people seem to get it anyway, pretty regularly.
Is that robots calling random numbers, or people specifically calling you? If its the latter you ticked the wrong privacy box somewhere.
Calm down Adam Landers
So, I shouldn't put my phone number on my resume?
If you are not going to pick it up, don't put it on there
You can't be possibly this dug in about this, so I have no choice but to believe that you are a troll. A bad one, at that
This is logic, not opinion.
Hand out your number to random people, you should expect to receive calls from random numbers.
Sure, and if those calls are important, if those callers expect a response, I expect them to leave a message. Giving my number to a potential employer doesn't mean I must answer every single call I receive on the off chance it's an employer that's received my resume, and it's frankly confusing that you seem to be arguing that.
If you read my responses that is not what I'm arguing. I'm taking issue with the people who don't answer calls from unknown numbers.
What do you think I think you're arguing? I've read your responses in our thread. It seems like your position is that one must always answer their phone, regardless of whether they recognize the number or not, if they have provided their number to a potential employer. To me that seems like a totally unreasonable position, because
There are several very valid reasons for not answering your phone outside of not recognizing the number
Not answering your phone for unrecognized numbers is best practice nowadays, since the amount of spam/scam calls people receive has never been higher
If a caller wants a response but can't reach a person with their initial call, leaving a message is the widely accepted next best course of action, as it clarifies to the recipient that even though the call came from an unrecognized number, it's a legitimate call and a response is expected
Again, I'm just baffled that you're arguing against any of this.
Agree with 1. Usually solved by calling the missed call back.
Disagree with 2. If that's your position, don't hand out your number to potential employers.
3 seems reasonable at face value, but I actually haven't listened to or left a voicemail in 10 years.
To placate your obvious irritation I'll happily accept people not answering unknown numbers if they are not expecting any.
I'm genuinely not irritated, just incredibly confused. Why haven't you listened to or left any voicemails in the years? Why do you think voicemails are unreasonable? Why don't you see that they're a perfectly reasonable way to communicate important things when someone doesn't answer their phone? What rock are you living under to where you disagree that spam/scam calls are more prevalent than ever? What makes you think that if you think spam/scam calls are more prevalent, that you shouldn't give your number to potential employers? Like how are those things related at all?
I just have more questions with every comment man. Confusion, genuine, heartfelt confusion. Not irritation.
I have no idea where my voicemail is (phone, network provider, webservice etc.), how to turn it in, or how to access it.
I automatically disconnect if I hear a machine, probably because I assume the receiver won't listen to it.
Not unreasonable, just unused and unheard.
Because you can't guarantee that the message will be heard, never mind acted upon.
Not an argument I made.
If you aren't answering because of spam/scam then you aren't answering employment enquiries.
Because they are both calls from unknown numbers.
All of these answers are either nonsensical or based purely on non-standard personal experience.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Counter-Counterpoint. If you call someone, you should understand that they may be unable to answer to phone at a that specific time, and you should use the tools at your disposal, such as voicemail, to facilitate further communication.
Oh yes. The boomer is at fault also (but will try calling again). His attitude wasn't my argument.