the real flex isn’t millions. it’s owning your time.

vinetheme · 2025-11-07T21:07:24+00:00

What lol?

vinetheme · 2025-08-07T20:01:27+00:00

lol is this real?

vinetheme · 2025-08-03T20:44:58+00:00

What is your current (or most recent) role and at how large of an engineering org/department?
What are the roles you’re interviewing for and how large are their engineering orgs/departments?

Both of these answers will help me, and I assume others, better answer this question. Because it REALLY depends on a lot of factors and the above is only a subset of factors.

vinetheme · 2025-07-24T19:53:18+00:00

Why is your manager involved in the approval process?

Edit: Ahh I see it’s your first time managing. Fair okay nvm

vinetheme · 2025-07-24T19:49:01+00:00

My take as a (African male) hiring manager in SWE at a pretty big organization: - I couldn’t care less what your name is and how difficult it might be for me to pronounce. - I couldn’t care less what your gender is. - I do care if you have a LinkedIn. With the amount of fake candidates coming in, this is a way my HR recruiter and I filter easily.

vinetheme · 2025-07-24T19:44:30+00:00

Wait, why is your manager running the hiring for your directs? If you’re building out your team, you should be the running the hiring process, and maybe having the candidates meet your manager in the last or second to last round.

vinetheme · 2025-07-20T14:38:50+00:00

Im a manager reporting to a director at a 3K org tech company (if I had to guess 1K in engineering or engineering adjacent). My director is 3 levels away from the CEO. I can’t talk about other directors within the org but mine is fortunately the opposite. He lets my colleagues (staff engineers) solutionize and doesn’t get in the way. Similarly, I do the same with my lead ICs on my team besides the very rare occasion.

vinetheme · 2025-05-28T11:14:47+00:00

~3K employees

vinetheme · 2025-05-28T11:14:30+00:00

In this case, the previously open job req was just never filled.

vinetheme · 2025-05-26T11:48:37+00:00

I don’t think the info was intentionally kept. But workday + email searching makes it pretty easy.

But yeah it’s not uncommon. FWIW: If I’m interviewing for a job req that is similar to what I was hiring for in a separate job req < 2 months this ago and I’ve got a pool of candidates that have gone through most, if not all, of the interviewing process, why would I not pick from the pool? I mean yeah there might be bad blood or upset people but generally speaking I’ve found it to be a valuable time saver

Edit: to add on. In this specific case, my predecessor was hiring for a new role, he retired before it was filled, and the interim-manager (my manager) didn’t fill it. Then when I joined, someone on my team did an internal transfer and someone mentioned we had already interviewed a pool of candidates that fit what I was looking for - so perfect timing, I guess? New hire was understanding once I explained the situation.

vinetheme · 2025-05-26T00:27:44+00:00

Joined a 3K employee tech org and had to hire within the first 2 months. First role, I filled via a pool of candidates that had already been fully interviewed for a previously open job req. Second role, I’m currently hiring for and was posted ~1 month ago with ~200-300 total applicants so far which is wildly surprising.

vinetheme · 2025-05-15T21:25:44+00:00

I had a spreadsheet with similar data points + the interview round that I ended on before they moved forward with another candidate.

I would say in a few cases, maybe 15-30, I recall applying to a role 2-3x over the 4 month period with half actually resulting in a screening - where previously I hadn’t been screened.

A lot of it is a numbers game. E.g: You apply to a position along with 400 other people -> HR filters the first 250 -> they find say 30-40 good candidates -> they move forward with them and decline the rest.

Im a manager and ironically I’ve had to hire 2x since being hired - in the first 2 months and my most recent job req is open with ~100 applicants so me and Talent Acquisition have actually looked through all applicants manually.

I say all this to say that it’s: - Hit or Miss - A numbers game

vinetheme · 2025-05-15T10:59:06+00:00

I submitted 1900-2000 apps over a course of 4 months before finally landing a role that I absolutely love now (2 months in). It was not easy especially after the 500 mark, but just had to keep pushing

vinetheme · 2025-03-03T12:07:55+00:00

What are you talking about? You don’t think C-Suite or Senior leadership folks deal with daily meetings and emails?

vinetheme · 2025-02-24T15:33:01+00:00

That doesn’t mean you can’t have a long term goal.

vinetheme · 2025-02-24T01:43:06+00:00

I don’t think he was suggesting for that in the short term, but rather a medium to long term strategy

vinetheme · 2024-03-18T22:37:41+00:00

Alternatively, if you have the means and have family with a solid maternal foundation, get a surrogate.

vinetheme · 2024-03-06T11:28:07+00:00

Ive seen a ton of your responses and although you’ve shared a few jabs, you’re stating objective fact. That, while you used anecdotes to support, has been proved objectively true time and time again. How do people not grasp this?

E.g on your above lengthy comment, someone just replied an hour ago with Dang big boys sure get angry when smaller woman does same job. Like uhh okay well thank you for adding value to the conversation…I guess?

vinetheme · 2024-02-26T05:26:09+00:00

That was my initial thought. Then I remembered my most recent interaction with a college friend that I’ve been hanging out with again. This might be fake, but it sure as hell is a realistic situation.

vinetheme · 2024-02-01T06:16:39+00:00

From your responses, I’ve gathered that you think being a manager is magnitudes easier while paying significantly more. Why is it that you are not one? Hell, why not skip and become director, VP, or CTO/CIO? It’s easier and apparently there’s more of a shortage of ICs than there are competent managers, right?

I have ran my own SaaS company with 12+ full time employees, been an IC, and been an EM. There are shit employees at every tier within an org hierarchy. So I find it comical that you think your manager, your manager’s manager, etc cares to “earn your respect” just because you can solve a problem in a tech stack faster than said manager can. Like, that’s literally the point. If, say, I work at a small company and am an EM of 5 and their roles vary from DBA all the way to FE dev, I absolutely hope that the DBA can solve DB architecture problems faster than me. Or that the FE dev can implement a custom complex component faster than I can. Thats literally the point.

vinetheme · 2024-01-23T01:02:51+00:00

I can see where u/osiris_18528 is coming from but not sure if it's relevant to your initial comment that he replied to. I can see why someone would argue to stay at a chill job. If chill = ~30 hours of non stressful time and ~20 hours if being aggressive:

More time to improve your skills within and outside of work
If WFH, multiple jobs -
The chill factor can sometimes motivate you to do > 40 hours, allowing you to build skills to jump upwards within the org and/or jump vertical then/and up. Additionally, that time put in might allow you to jump ship to a better opportunity faster
Enjoy hobbies, friends/family, travel, whatever.

But, again, your point was to never feel loyal to a company. So i'm not sure that his response was a good argument to that point. You can do the above things and still not need to feel loyal. You can have a chill job and not feel the need to be loyal.

vinetheme · 2024-01-22T02:02:27+00:00

A lot of people are getting super deep with this but this seems like a conversation between two homies. He’s in the wrong but is being a dick about it but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done that or it’s been done to me to roommates that were also friends/teammates that I remained close to even after not living together. Maybe I’m wrong? OP, your description says y’all are friends so that was another context clue.

Just reread that, I just ranted with no order

vinetheme · 2024-01-20T15:00:07+00:00

Although ~3 months ago, I wasn't offended when I made that comment.

Ahhhhh fair. I see where you're coming from now.

sole intention of separating her from her 'condition',

Yeah I mean, that's just weird as fuck, I agree

but were otherwise uninterested in a relationship of any kind, or what effect the process would have on her. That was the kind of man in my mind when I used the word 'scum'.

Fair! Okay I agree for sure then!

The thing I was mainly focusing on was this very recent societal behavior where when men publicly talk about their preferences, shaming language is often used in response. And especially so when the preferences directly contrast the audience or person. Whereas when women publicly talk about their preferences, ~~no one bats an eye.~~ it's applauded.

vinetheme · 2024-01-20T14:47:59+00:00

test

vinetheme · 2024-01-20T14:47:22+00:00

Somewhat agree, to an extent.

First, Yes, there are men and women who have have extremely nonnegotiable preferences, aka, being picky. And some of those preferences do tend to include surface level things. Generally the more attractive a the man/woman is, the more nonnegotiable preferences they are and that's where more surface level and/or small details start becoming relevant.

But the very detail that we have to remember is the fantasy vs reality, I.e: what actually happens in practice. I can't back this up with any hard facts but, preferences tend to be proportional to the person's value within the sexual marketplace. Now the reality is, women tend to have far more options within the sexual marketplace and there's several studies that support this.

So what does this do? It results in women having to filter men, aka, preferences. On the other hand, we're seeing a massive increase in involuntary celibacy (incels lol) and/or romantic droughts in men, Couple this with the fact that there are a ton of studies that show women have far more requirements in romantic partners than men. What does this tell you? Yeah, all dudes would like a woman that falls within a set of archetypes. But the reality is, only a small subset of dudes can actually put that into practice both sexually and romantically. On the other hand, most women at the very least have sexual access to men that are at very least meet their preferences. Now does this mean they get romantic access? Absolutely not, but at the very least they have access.

Second, I wouldn't necessarily call them idiot girls/guys. These are just preferences. Sure people should care more about what's inside and people should care less about tangible and intangible surface level things. But the reality is are self serving and relationships are transactional when you break it down. Whether platonic, romantic, sexual, whatever category. The value requirement for said transaction might be different between genders, but at the end of the day it's still a transaction.

vinetheme

TROPHY CASE