[dmitryminkovsky]

> AND FYI - recruiters get ghosted too by employers for various reasons.

Eveyone ghosts everyone, all the time... and that's okay? I may be in the minority here, but to be honest I think I actually prefer getting ghosted.

It's like the proverb: "A wise man hears one word and understands two." I don't need a polite but almost always vacant pleasantry, which is what this site is saying is missing ("manners"). If I didn't get a reply, that's a lot of information already. That's all I need to know.

Now, many people do want to know why they didn't get a job, what they can improve upon, etc. That's a way more relatable gripe for me. Still, everything in life is a numbers game. You'll always want to know why someone broke up with you, and part of growing up for me was realizing that you'll never find out and that's okay.

EDIT: To clarify, not advocating ghosting and certainly not something I practice in my personal life. It's definitely better to be polite and direct whenever possible.

[PragmaticPulp]

> I may be in the minority here, but to be honest I think I actually prefer getting ghosted.

I don't think it's appropriate for recruiters to ghost candidates.

However, I will say that I think many younger candidates really would prefer being ghosted to being explicitly rejected. The nature of interviewing means that I send a lot more rejection e-mails than offer letters. A surprising number of candidates have very negative reactions to rejection letters, from trying to argue that we've made a mistake to posting negative reviews of our company on Glassdoor or even Google Maps. People hate the feeling of rejection.

I still send polite rejection letters, but I can see how jaded interviewers would err on the side of ghosting candidates to avoid possible retribution. It only takes a few serious over-reactions to make you extra careful about dealing with candidates.

[emerged]

Ghosting is a problem in business contexts when the other side may be waiting before continuing their search elsewhere. I just ran into this with a mortgage lender. I waited for a follow up email about a loan and the entire thing ended up falling off my radar. Had they simply replied with a “sorry no” I would’ve just moved on to another lender.

It’s my own fault really, because I should’ve just contacted multiple lenders, but I had an existing relationship with this place and was giving them the courtesy of first priority.

[franga2000]

> If I didn't get a reply, that's a lot of information already. That's all I need to know.

This goes beyond manners - wanting a concrete response is a matter of practicality for me. Most of the time, interviewers don't give you a concrete time by which to expect a reply and when they do, they intentionally exaggerate it in case something stalls the process for a bit. I might be waiting for a month and a bit to hear back, even though the hiring process might've already concluded after 2 weeks. Those are 2 weeks I could've spent getting/doing more interviews.

I've never been part of the hiring process, but I can't imagine sending an automated rejection email would be too difficult. There's got to be some sort of kanban board (like Trello) with a rejection pile at the end. As soon as a card is dropped there, the email can be fired out and those people can know for sure that they should look elsewhere. It might even be good for the company - how many great engineers didn't apply for your listing because they were still waiting to hear back from the first batch? You might be missing out...

[MivLives]

I think it depends where I am in the process and what's been said. No response what so ever to the initial contact is perfectly fine and understandable. If I'm in the second round, and you mention to email you about scheduling the third, that's pretty annoying. Or when you've received a verbal offer with no follow up in writing.