[paulglx]

> 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.

[bachmeier]

As is this:

> Don’t feel like you have continue the conversation if they respond. You can if you want, but don’t feel obligated.

You: Sorry you got laid off. I'll miss chatting about your family.

Them: I understand why they did it, but this is tough. I've got a kid in college and another graduating high school this year. Hopefully I'll be able to find something in a few months. Know of anyone that's hiring?

You: <no response>

[mooreds]

Author here. I was trying to walk the line between two concepts in tension:

* you want to treat your former co-worker as a human being. That's the whole point of the post.

* it can be scary or shameful to reach out to someone who was just let go. You wonder things like "why them and not me, what did they do wrong, what if they react negatively, I'm busy with other stuff, oh man, is my job at risk". (The caveat here is of course that those who remain still have income and so the burden is worse for the laid off.)

This is why I think some folks don't do this simple, humane, outreach. But they should. So I was trying to address the latter worry.

I doubt most conversations go negative (as I mentioned, I've never had them do so). I wanted to give permission to people to reach out because that is important but also permission to stop the conversation if it reached a point they didn't feel comfortable.

I am sure I could have phrased it better.

W/r/t your example, I think most folks who sent the first message you suggest would respond. I think I would.

[ncruces]

> I am sure I could have phrased it better.

I'm not a native speaker, but this sounds/reads awful:

… but I can’t continue this conversation.

I'd definitely swap that out for (or similar):

… but I don't wanna go there. Sorry.

[southernplaces7]

Your phrasing in that post reads like boilerplate neutered corporate-speak, of the kind you'd get from some HR parasite instead of another fellow co-worker who might actually give half a shit about your misfortune. To start, describing their being fired as "parting ways" would be flat out insulting enough to toss the whole thing into the trash folder.

Also, "Don’t feel like you have continue the conversation if they respond. You can if you want, but don’t feel obligated."

Then what's the point of saying anything if it's just a meaningless single token of HR-speak sludge? better to not even write in the first place.

[fenomas]

I think the point there was that, deciding in advance that you don't necessarily have to continue the conversation can unblock you from sending the mail in the first place. Thinking "if they reply back and say XYZ I wouldn't know how to respond" can be a reason people might not get in touch like TFA is suggesting.

[shortrounddev2]

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?

[sodapopcan]

I actually got an email like from an old co-worker after I was fired. It was done much in the vein of the advice in this post. It was short, friendly, and made no pretence about staying in touch. I gave a short, friendly response and that was that. I gotta say I actually really did appreciate it, and still do. Of course, I wasn’t exactly upset about being fired so I don’t know if this counts.

[lapcat]

Agreed. The blog post starts off fairly well, with step 1 to being a good human being, but pivots ironically at the end to a list of ways not be a human being.

It feels more like how to do the minimum possible without doing absolutely nothing.

[kijin]

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.

[John23832]

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.

[kijin]

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.

[John23832]

> 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.

[kypro]

This isn't bad advise if the wording wasn't so robotic.

You can empathise with someone for being upset without contributing to further the discussion. In situations like this I normally redirect... So if I received a message like, "I'm really mad at X-Corp and Mr Bossman, I can't believe they got rid of Joe!", I'd probably reply, "it's sad, I hope he's doing alright".

As long as you're not saying "yeah, f** Bossman!" you're probably fine.

That's obviously assuming you want to avoid trashing your employer... I find these events are often times for reflection. It's okay to be critical if you feel strongly, but you should do that in a professional and productive way. But if something happens which you strongly disagree with then you have a responsibility to do what you think is right, sometimes at personal cost.

[swiftcoder]

> As long as you're not saying "yeah, f* Bossman!" you're probably fine.

You're probably fine saying "yeah, f** Bossman!" too. What are they going to do, read your personal emails and then fire you too for expressing emotion over layoffs?

[llm_nerd]

The whole post is super weird. It's like "A guide for an LLM agent to pretend empathy".

Better advice -- do what's right for your and your relationship with the person. General advice is misdirected.

[kakacik]

Seems like new age of paranoia is upon us - everything is written by llm, everything is suspicious. This post. Yours. Everything.

What a sad mode to live by if true.

[llm_nerd]

Dear <<HN commentator>>,

I didn't say it was made by an LLM, though, did I? I actually said it is written like a prompt for an LLM by someone trying to ape what they see as human behaviours. It comes across as spectacularly facile and worthless.

<<Reference shared memory. Highlight future possibilities or collaborations>>

Kindly yours,

<<Author>>

[frotaur]

Really feels like the response LLMs give.

[netule]

> I can imagine why you’d feel that way, but I can’t continue this conversation.

This is ChatGPT, 100%.

[hylaride]

Yeah, an empathetic person would understand how and why the person is feeling the way they are and acknowledge it. There can be of course legal repercussions to going off on your employer, but even a "yeah, that's now how I would have done it myself", etc can show that you actually do care.

If somebody you know was dumped recently and is saying negative things about their ex, it's perfectly fine to "agree" or commiserate while they process and go through the stages of grief (ignoring any issues like their ex being family, etc).

The author reads to me like one of those perennial "think positive thoughts only" people that think that'll get them success.

[emigre]

You're absolutely right!

[John23832]

Right, like why say anything at all? Just ignore them out the door if you're going to ignore their emotions as well.

[psygn89]

It really is, it reads like someone that has their social interactions in transactions.

[ravenstine]

Yeah, seriously. Fuck that lame shit.

Obviously I wouldn't resort to mere ad hominem, but we should call a spade a spade. If someone's trashing their employer, more likely than not, they are probably speaking the truth; unlike most who go along to get along. Corporations, at the end of the day, are sociopaths, and I'm not going to pass down their lack of empathy by proxy with toxic positivity.

[zdragnar]

> If someone's trashing their employer, more likely than not, they are probably speaking the truth

Oddly, this has not been my experience. People bitter about being let go tend to project just as much as anyone else suffering from intense negative emotions, and they tend to gloss over their own contributions in doing so (assuming the termination isn't part of a mass layoff).

At the end of the day, I agree that toxic positivity isn't helping anyone, but it's also better (imho) to not feed unconstructive negativity. If they need to vent, let them vent, then pivot.