I can accept the song and dance interpretation of things, but contest that it isn’t degrading and ultimately either useless or arguably detrimental. To go as extreme as possible: slavery was once common and rote and that did not make it anything less than a dehumanizing crime against humanity. Being common does not make it OK. There are better options and holding on to things because that’s how it’s always been is a fallacy.
To follow up, and reveal my own biases, the song and dance is hard for many people who are neurodivergent (and presumably some subset of neurotypicals, but I can’t really speak from experience there). I’m a bad liar. It’s one thing to selectively pick facts and let people make assumptions (which I’m meh at at best, and need prep for and don’t enjoy doing) and another to openly make shit up on the fly (or have your bullshit prepared in advance). And for people such as myself that are bad at and uncomfortable with directly lying, despite my qualifications, now I’m screwed because society values dishonesty for some deeply stupid reason. And just riding the wave at this point: is incentivizing brown nosing and lying really what we want? Because that seems like a bad incentive.
Comparing the mundane small talk and boring back and forth of an interview to the shattering evil of slavery is well past extreme. These two things should not be compared in any context.
Youre not alone in being nuerodivergent. It was realizing that the interview process is an act, with orchestrated motions, that makes it approachable. Its not about lying or being lied to. Its a series of motions that repeat basicslly everywhere. You can learn and practice these motions, because they are so repetitive, and become very good at them.
Literally read off and practice answers to common interview questions. Any “top 10” or “top 100” guide. Have an answer to each of them, and practice them. You’ll be stunned how often they come up, and how much easier interviews get. You still wont get every job, but you’ll come through as a much better candidate in most cases.
You left the conditions for “acceptable behavior” as “common and rote”. The point of the extremity was to demonstrate that this is a bad definition. Your revulsion to the comparison would indicate you understand this on some level, though that assertion is flimsier.
Well yeah, of course you can look up the questions and plan out answers. Hell, many of the questions are useful to ask. And get good results. I would further recommend that to prospective interviewees in spite of the heartburn the idea gives me. I’ll play the damned game but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t rub me the wrong way. Familiarity does not necessarily breed comfort. Sometimes all you get is resignation to an unpleasant task. But that wasn’t my point.
The point was this particular, common question is insulting and demeaning to everyone involved for no value to the interviewer and that the only plausible justification for it boils down to “its tradition” (which is a stupid reason to keep it) and further incentivizes character features that I hazard are socially detrimental (brown nosing and lying are not typically positive traits).
I can accept the song and dance interpretation of things, but contest that it isn’t degrading and ultimately either useless or arguably detrimental. To go as extreme as possible: slavery was once common and rote and that did not make it anything less than a dehumanizing crime against humanity. Being common does not make it OK. There are better options and holding on to things because that’s how it’s always been is a fallacy.
To follow up, and reveal my own biases, the song and dance is hard for many people who are neurodivergent (and presumably some subset of neurotypicals, but I can’t really speak from experience there). I’m a bad liar. It’s one thing to selectively pick facts and let people make assumptions (which I’m meh at at best, and need prep for and don’t enjoy doing) and another to openly make shit up on the fly (or have your bullshit prepared in advance). And for people such as myself that are bad at and uncomfortable with directly lying, despite my qualifications, now I’m screwed because society values dishonesty for some deeply stupid reason. And just riding the wave at this point: is incentivizing brown nosing and lying really what we want? Because that seems like a bad incentive.
Comparing the mundane small talk and boring back and forth of an interview to the shattering evil of slavery is well past extreme. These two things should not be compared in any context.
Youre not alone in being nuerodivergent. It was realizing that the interview process is an act, with orchestrated motions, that makes it approachable. Its not about lying or being lied to. Its a series of motions that repeat basicslly everywhere. You can learn and practice these motions, because they are so repetitive, and become very good at them.
Literally read off and practice answers to common interview questions. Any “top 10” or “top 100” guide. Have an answer to each of them, and practice them. You’ll be stunned how often they come up, and how much easier interviews get. You still wont get every job, but you’ll come through as a much better candidate in most cases.
You left the conditions for “acceptable behavior” as “common and rote”. The point of the extremity was to demonstrate that this is a bad definition. Your revulsion to the comparison would indicate you understand this on some level, though that assertion is flimsier.
Well yeah, of course you can look up the questions and plan out answers. Hell, many of the questions are useful to ask. And get good results. I would further recommend that to prospective interviewees in spite of the heartburn the idea gives me. I’ll play the damned game but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t rub me the wrong way. Familiarity does not necessarily breed comfort. Sometimes all you get is resignation to an unpleasant task. But that wasn’t my point.
The point was this particular, common question is insulting and demeaning to everyone involved for no value to the interviewer and that the only plausible justification for it boils down to “its tradition” (which is a stupid reason to keep it) and further incentivizes character features that I hazard are socially detrimental (brown nosing and lying are not typically positive traits).