Posting like this breaks the rules at the top of the thread. Not cool; please don't. I'm not saying you didn't have a bad experience, but these threads are not a suitable place for getting to the bottom of what happened in any remotely fair way.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20087521 and marked it off-topic.

I don’t know which position you interviewed for, but my guess is one involving javascript, as it’s, I believe, the only one where we ask to use a library.

If that’s the case, the “obscure” library is immutable.js [0], one with mere 27k+ stars on github.

I do apologize that we didn’t outright said that we are not a good fit. Would be curious to learn what do you think we should’ve done.

It’s completely fine not to be interested/willing to take a coding challenge, just don’t know what was your expectation after you decided not to proceed with the assignment.

[0] https://github.com/immutable-js/immutable-js

Regardless of how many stars the repo has on github, why would you expect someone to learn a library just to take a code challenge for your company when the job spec doesn't even mention this library as a requirement? The recruiter specified that "it should only take 2 hours" to complete the task, while thats absolutely false as I would have to read the whole API etc. Also when I asked for a different challenge in either Vanilla JS or any other of the technologies in the job spec you completely ghosted.

It worked out absolutely fine for me since I got a much better paid job but just warned other people what to expect.

I don’t think any company specifies exactly the job requirements as there are many, especially as the job progresses. The point of the assignment is to see how well can you deal with new challenges.

Interestingly enough, other developers went through the assignment without any trouble way under 2 hours.

Glad it worked out for you. Not everyone is the right fit and I’m glad we found out earlier than later.

Good luck

> other developers went through the assignment without any trouble way under 2 hours.

May be they did know immutable.js already, few may have even starred the project on github.

We actually asked. None of them used immutable.js before, two heard about it in the past.

I did address the ghosting in other comments. He decided not do the assignment. We should have been more explicit and outright say that we are not a good fit, which is our mistake.

What about the snark?

What about it. He said it's an obscure library. I wanted to make sure that others get the full picture.

I am fascinated to see that you do not see anything wrong with sacra-quoting someone-else's words in Public.

I am glad that I don't interact with you regularly.

Hounding someone like this (in a job ad thread, of all places) is not cool. Please don't do this on HN again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Could you point me to exact guideline? I fail to see it in the list.

I do however see 'dont be snarky'.

"Be kind", for starters.

Which is my point as well through out the comment thread.

Are you sure you are not picking your favorite position in the argument, and reffering the opposing perspective as "not in line with the guidelines"?

I know it always feels like the mods must be against you when you get a moderation reply, but I'm moderately sure we're not doing that. There is probably some unconscious bias but given how much practice we have at staying neutral—e.g. making a point of moderating bad comments even if we agree with them—such bias is probably relatively subtle. We also have a lot of practice at reviewing our own decisions, since users aren't shy about pointing out what they feel was biased. In those cases the moderation calls are usually defensible. Also, if we were grossly biased, we'd get major pushback from the community, which is always on the lookout for moderator overreach. That doesn't happen very often.

The thing is, even if someone else was being unkind, you still have to follow the site guidelines in how you respond.

What you reas as a snark was just a point. He called the library obscure. Don’t believe many others would use that description. I quoted it to make a point not to take a stab at him.

Same goes to this conversation. While you attack me personally I just address your points.

There is no personal attack, I am saying your manner of presenting the point puts OP down, with snark, which many, including myself won't like.

You can choose to "win" the argument, or you can choose to learn.

> I quoted it to make a point not to take a stab at him.

"For JS projects, we ask candidates to use immutable.js, which has 27k stars on github, which most wont' consider as obscure"

vs.

"... the “obscure” library is immutable.js, one with _mere_ (emphasis mine) 27k+ stars on github."

Quotes are used for snark in this context, and you know this as well as I do.

We have different style of communication. You are obviously more sensitive to the style of writing than I’m. You are correct I could have style my answer differently.

I was trying to address the two points he made for other candidates. He used strong language and I just addressed his exact words.

As you said, in your earlier comment, we would not work well together.