I made a website to share rejection letters
A new site that publishes job rejection letters is prompting mixed reactions about hiring etiquette and transparency. Many commenters welcome the chance to vent and learn from others’ experiences, but others warn it could push companies to ghost candidates or give only vague boilerplate to avoid online shaming and legal risk. The conversation broadens into stories of both unusually respectful and egregiously bad rejections, highlighting how opaque, inconsistent hiring practices can damage trust between employers and applicants.
Value and Risks of Rejection Letters
- Many see basic closure as a minimum courtesy; ghosting is viewed as far worse and damaging to a company’s reputation.
- Others argue detailed feedback is risky: it invites disputes, consumes time, and may create legal exposure, pushing companies toward generic templates or silence.
- Some worry that sites showcasing rejection letters incentivize companies to stop sending any responses at all.
Quality, Tone, and Content
- Many examples in the site/thread are criticized as badly written, overly generic, or unintentionally insulting.
- Some praise more thoughtful formulations (e.g., framing as “role not suited to your talents”) and use the site as inspiration for better wording.
- There’s debate over “we received an overwhelming number of qualified applicants” and “we decided not to fill the position” – seen as either honest context or face‑saving platitudes.
“We’ll Keep Your Resume on File”
- Some call it meaningless boilerplate.
- Others report it genuinely led to internships or full‑time roles months or years later, even at large companies.
- There is confusion when companies say they’ll keep data but never clarify what that practically means.
Feedback vs Legal/Operational Constraints
- Several posters want specific, actionable feedback and say it’s the best form of rejection.
- Others stress that real reasons can be harsh or legally sensitive (“not smart enough”, culture concerns, diversity targets), so managers avoid writing them down.
- Some question how real the litigation risk is versus simple disorganization and workload.
Interview Process Frustrations
- Stories of multi‑round processes ending in sudden freezes, position cancellations, or abrupt rejections.
- Candidates increasingly set their own limits (e.g., max three interviews).
- Ghosting after multiple rounds is cited as the worst experience.
Site Authenticity, Moderation, and UX
- Several posts claim many letters look fake or trollish (e.g., parody rejections from well‑known tech firms, joke porn site responses).
- Concerns include lack of verification, potential defamation, and eventual influx of offensive content.
- Users offer bug reports and small UX suggestions; later comments mention the site going “off the rails” and eventually being flagged as malware/phishing.