[noirbot]

Sure, but that's a classic tragedy of the commons. I've been applying selectively to some places over time, and have had less than 10% even send me a rejection letter. As an applicant, if I actually needed a job, I can't afford to send out a handful of applications and wait 2-3 weeks to find out if I'm even being considered before sending out more.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, I've often had companies who did interview me take weeks to initiate the process from when I applied.

[sokoloff]

If you’re applying to jobs that you (more or less) meet the qualifications for, there’s nothing at all for anyone to object to.

What I do find negative (and unlikely to succeed anyway) is people shotgunning to roles that they aren’t remotely qualified for.

I think qualified applicants have a hard time believing the volume of utterly unqualified applicants who knock on the virtual door of every SWE opening.

[noirbot]

But what would a company do about that? That feels like complaining people don't read their email because of spam. You can't unilaterally prevent spammers, you can just improve filtering, which is something that's more on the company than something to blame on applicants.

[sokoloff]

Erecting algorithmic/automated testing to qualify candidates is the rational response (that’s frequently complained about by candidates).