I'm not bristling like you're attacking me, that again is you assuming my reaction. You've done it multiple times. That isn't how you have a productive conversation.
You said distinctly that if I said it wasn't an impact, that I just wouldn't admit that it was. That is calling me a liar.
I do not consider things that are "correlated" with a previous salary. I consider only if you can do the role. You can make less or more, and it doesn't change the reality that you need to fit into a very high performing logical team.
I don't have a college degree, and would never consider it in a hiring process. I don't know if I've ever hired someone with a previous position at a Best Buy retail location, however I have certainly hired people with relevant experience of that.
Again, you continue to assume my actions. That's all you're doing, creating a model in your head of who I am based on your past experiences, and then questioning me to confirm I am who you've made up in your head.
The current process is certainly broken, but it isn't due to interviewing. If you'd have asked that question, I could have explained it. Instead you've done nothing but tell me who I am, which is incorrect.
>You said distinctly that if I said it wasn't an impact, that I just wouldn't admit that it was. That is calling me a liar.
This is not distinct or clear to me; I certainly can't say you are lying when I can't parse this.
>I do not consider things that are "correlated" with a previous salary.
Ok, I believe you believe this if you say so. It doesn't sound like a lie. I can't understand how you can believe it.
>Again, you continue to assume my actions
The things I am confident about have nothing to do with your actions.
There's a lot of talk about things like "institutional racism" and it seems to me deeply weird that it is such an emotional topic, when it should be a bloodless technical one, given the premises. Namely that because of correlations, outcomes that are not intentional are endemic.
The overall sense I have of your comments is that the idea of unintended consequences is offensive. But how do you correct anything without thinking about them?
You said distinctly that if I said it wasn't an impact, that I just wouldn't admit that it was. That is calling me a liar.
I do not consider things that are "correlated" with a previous salary. I consider only if you can do the role. You can make less or more, and it doesn't change the reality that you need to fit into a very high performing logical team.
I don't have a college degree, and would never consider it in a hiring process. I don't know if I've ever hired someone with a previous position at a Best Buy retail location, however I have certainly hired people with relevant experience of that.
Again, you continue to assume my actions. That's all you're doing, creating a model in your head of who I am based on your past experiences, and then questioning me to confirm I am who you've made up in your head.
The current process is certainly broken, but it isn't due to interviewing. If you'd have asked that question, I could have explained it. Instead you've done nothing but tell me who I am, which is incorrect.
Have a nice day.