[aimazon]

Some companies are just very selective, i.e: they're hiring the right people not the best candidate. Most of us get jobs because companies need to fill a role and we're the best candidate of a bad bunch... most of us (whether we have 22 years and a fancy title or not) would not get a job at a company that hires carefully because we're probably not a good fit for their very niche view of what a good hire is.

[ninininino]

I agree and there's nothing that disincentivizes companies from "over-soliciting applications". Having 100000 applicants vs 100 has no downside other than: 1) you need to literally post your application URL more places. 2) you might not get through skimming or auto-screening / OCR-ing all the resumes/apps.

From an incentives POV, the job application space does not properly incentivize saving the mental energy and time of either recruiters or applicants.

Automation and reduced friction has made the situation a kind of arm's race and mess.

[LittleTimothy]

It makes total sense for a startup to be highly selective. But being overly selective at the CV/application stage is dumb. If they really do have some really highly specialized requirement that should be on the advert. If they don't then being having a high rejection rate at the CV screen stage is going to be easy - it's easy to reject people, but you're overwhelmingly likely to screen out the few candidates that are actually a good fit. So sure, expect a low success rate but a low reply rate is an indicator the company isn't serious about hiring.

[scarface_74]

If you are getting thousands of applications, you have to be selective at the application stage.

[LittleTimothy]

If you're getting so many applications that you have to apply such a harsh screen that you're likely losing most of your good candidates via false negatives then you shouldn't be soliciting more applicants to apply. This is what this thread is about - if you're saying these guys are getting so many applications they have to start just brutally cutting CVs almost arbitrarily then they definitely shouldn't be posting on HN about their vacancies. Not least because they're poisoning the well.

This is a real issue - I once got approached by a recruiter for a company, it was a good fit, I think I would've walked the interview and been a great hire - I'd heard of them before. The founder had acted like a dick head to one of my friends, I just immediately turned it down. There is a cost to very publicly treating people poorly. People don't seem to understand that these things that big companies might get away with due to scale, smaller companies cannot. People talk.