zlacker

>>moored+(OP)
> Don’t trash your employer, nor respond if they do. If they start that, say “I’m sorry, I can imagine why you’d feel that way, but I can’t continue this conversation.”

This is so bizarre. I would show a huge lack of empathy as well.

>>paulgl+0Ba
Yeah why even send them a message if you're not interested in actually talking? What do they get out of it? What do you get out of it?

>>shortr+ZCa
You might have been interested in continuing the conversation if the other person didn't descend into trash-talking first. I think that's the message the author is trying to convey.

But I agree with you that "I can't continue this conversation" is probably not the best way to respond, even in that case.

>>kijin+TFa
This person has been let go and you're reaching out _to them_.

If you don't care about the person and their emotions, don't say anything. Nobody else will know otherwise (other than the person you clearly don't actually care about). Feigning care is sometimes worse than just clearly not caring at all.

>>John23+VGa
Just because you have a limit to how much you're willing to care about somebody doesn't mean that you are feigning the care that you do give.

Most people have reasonable expectations about how much care they can expect from some random colleague from a past project.

>>kijin+JHa
> Just because you have a limit to how much you're willing to care about somebody doesn't mean that you are feigning the care that you do give.

And the limit is just engaging with someone in a way that they didn't ask you for, and in a manner that doesn't serve them at all?

> Most people have reasonable expectations about how much care they can expect from some random colleague from a past project.

The context here is a person who was just let go. Like, not an old buddy from a previous job.

Maybe it's the New Yorker in me, but if you're not going to serve a purpose, emotionally, financially, physically, etc... mind your own business.