zlacker

>>winsto+(OP)
This is horrible, what a breach of trust. I used TB to stealthily interview for jobs, had a good experience. Recommended them to others. Now I see that if I hadn't seen this post, I wouldn't have known about this and those details would have been public, which had the potential to seriously undermine me at my current position. I'll opt out tomorrow, but according to others it sounds like the visibility link was somewhat hidden. At least with this they're well on the way to becoming the next LinkedIn, at least by their practices. What a dark pattern.

>>gansty+u5
Your Triplebyte profile will NOT contain any data/details about you or your job search that will undermine you at your current employer. We should have included a screenshot and more details in the email. I'll talk to my team about following up with more details tomorrow. We are talking about a lightweight profile, like your Stack Overflow or HN profile, to provide us the canvas to release badges. That's it.

>>ammon+Pa
Hey! Welcome to your first PR disaster.

I would suggest you step away from any scripts and turn on the company ears. Simply explaining what is going on more “clear” and repeating it more often probably won’t get you anywhere good.

Why does this make your users uncomfortable? How can you work with them to achieve your product goals without undermining your relationship with them?

Good luck!

>>iovrth+Xd
> Simply explaining what is going on more “clear” and repeating it more often probably won’t get you anywhere good.

I've learned this lesson personally. Trying to be "clear" about my own perspective while ignoring what the other person feels.

"You don't like what you see? Impossible, you just can't see it. Let me make you see!"

>>hitekk+Ne
The rhetorical technique that annoys me the most plays out like this...

Me: Thing You: I hate that thing Me: You don’t understand Thing. Here’s Thing explained. You: I understand Thing, I still hate it. Me: You don’t understand Thing. When you understand it, you’ll like it. (Repeat)

Sometimes this is stupidity thinking that understanding is missing, but I think it’s usually shady just so they have something to say to counter the objection that is visible to people outside the conversation, who are interested, and at least see some form of technical interaction.

>>prepen+QL
There needs to be a catchy name for this type of interaction. I loathe it as well and it's annoyingly common. Companies that rely on this behavior should be called out repeatedly.

>>rurp+Nu1
Willful misunderstanding? Confusion redirect? Defray to diffuse?

The technique seems super common now, and I’ve been expecting to run into it in some communications training, but haven’t yet.

I feel like there’s some crisis PR tactics this fits into that involves “Never disagree, redirect and ignore.” It diffuses criticism and makes it hard to argue.

It seems related to when I see a complaint on a review site that’s been responded to with “I’m the manager, please call me.” It doesn’t resolve the issue, but it shows that someone is doing something, so it diffuses pile on because it stops complaints of ignoring customers.