You are implying this is intentional. That has not been established. For all we know, an essential person to the hiring process died from COVID, putting some real ghost in the ghosting.

The CEO responded. He doesn't agree that this is norm, but he can't, can he?

One person, one story, n equals one. 1 does not equal 10,000. Worse, hiring has x^n variables. He could have nailed the interview, astonished absolutely everybody into hiring him, only to be outcompete the very next day by the guy who wrote the book on managing managers at financial institutions.

The attempt to amplify this as something oft-repeated at Stripe lacks evidence. “I've heard this” and “I've heard that” about Stripe is hearsay, secondary, questionable at best.

Doesn't this post strike you as mildly disgruntled?

> who wrote the book on managing managers at financial institutions

I've been around and worked with people who have written books, maybe not "the" books (one of them might have been, actually) - and honestly, one of the people who wrote a book was one of the worst developers I had worked with. The other was good but extremely lazy.

The one who wrote what might have been "the" book on a topic was (in my eyes) a fraud, he was fired shortly after he was brought on to consult, along with the CEO and marketing dept which brought him in.

That's not a fair response. I clearly see what you're saying. Of course you're right. It's only decent they close the loop, but the reality is it's messy.

LCA might have a policy specifically precluding Stripe from communicating anything with regards to an unsuccessful interview.

>The CEO responded. He doesn't agree that this is norm, but he can't, can he?

I think, the CEO responding has no impact at all, as the options for him is to reply exactly in the way he responded to this thread or not reply at all. Either way, he can not admit anything going wrong within his company, so it is meaningless.