In an era where social media often doubles as a public courtroom, one job applicant’s frustration over an unresponsive startup took a dramatic turn. Ravi Kumar, a tech professional, took to X to call out a startup co-founded by Pratham Grover, accusing them of ghosting applicants post-interview. What he likely anticipated as a rallying cry for accountability, however, quickly spiraled into a viral exposé with very personal consequences.
Responding to Grover’s general post about hiring, Kumar lashed out, saying, “If you are hiring for your startup and are not replying to applicants' emails, it's a scam alert.” He claimed that all he received were automated rejections and no real human feedback — a sentiment many jobseekers resonate with. But Grover’s reply wasn’t just a clarification. It was a full-blown callout.
“Failed as a Human”: Recruiter Claps Back with Receipts
Grover hit back with an unexpectedly candid post:
“Hi Ravi, you failed the interview, were flagged during the background verification, and exposed as a misogynist. Also failed as a decent human. No surprises here. Cheers, Recruitment Team.”
To add weight to his words, Grover attached screenshots of Kumar’s old tweets, which included dismissive responses to a woman seeking internship advice, suggesting she “get married” and “manage a household.” Other tweets showed him publicly venting against recruiters and mocking the hiring process itself.
It wasn’t just a rebuttal — it was a full character judgment delivered in 280 characters.
Social Media or Surveillance Tool?
The drama didn’t end there. As reactions poured in, the internet quickly split into camps. While some sympathized with Kumar’s frustration over ghosting and the silence that plagues job applications, others championed Grover’s no-nonsense stance, lauding him for calling out problematic behavior.
Still, some found the recruiter’s approach excessive. “Why was a background check needed for a candidate who failed the interview?” one user asked. Another chimed in: “Checking someone’s personal X handle for background checks is very weird.” But for others, the message was clear — digital footprints matter.
Recruiter’s Justification: “Skills Can Be Nurtured, Behaviour Can’t”
To further clarify his public takedown, Grover later posted an extended tweet explaining his actions. According to him, Kumar was being considered for a bounty assignment despite not acing the interview. The team had even added him to a shortlist out of courtesy. However, his public criticism soured the equation.
Grover explained that upon revisiting Kumar’s timeline, he noticed a pattern of “hateful, entitled, and toxic” behavior. “He acts like recruiters owe him a favour,” Grover wrote, adding that professionalism doesn’t end with a follow-up email — it includes humility and respect.
“Skills can be nurtured. Behaviour can’t. That’s not my job,” he concluded, underscoring the importance of attitude in the hiring process.
A Lesson in Online Etiquette?
The digital spat has sparked a wider conversation: where do we draw the line between professional critique and personal responsibility? With social media now playing an unspoken role in hiring assessments, applicants may need to weigh every post, comment, and retweet like a line on their résumé.
While companies are being urged to be more transparent and responsive during hiring, candidates are being reminded — loudly and publicly — that how you present yourself online could speak louder than your CV.
In an age where professional and personal personas often blur, this viral encounter might just be the wake-up call jobseekers and recruiters alike didn’t know they needed.
Would you hire someone based on their timeline?
Responding to Grover’s general post about hiring, Kumar lashed out, saying, “If you are hiring for your startup and are not replying to applicants' emails, it's a scam alert.” He claimed that all he received were automated rejections and no real human feedback — a sentiment many jobseekers resonate with. But Grover’s reply wasn’t just a clarification. It was a full-blown callout.
“Failed as a Human”: Recruiter Claps Back with Receipts
Grover hit back with an unexpectedly candid post:
“Hi Ravi, you failed the interview, were flagged during the background verification, and exposed as a misogynist. Also failed as a decent human. No surprises here. Cheers, Recruitment Team.”
To add weight to his words, Grover attached screenshots of Kumar’s old tweets, which included dismissive responses to a woman seeking internship advice, suggesting she “get married” and “manage a household.” Other tweets showed him publicly venting against recruiters and mocking the hiring process itself.
It wasn’t just a rebuttal — it was a full character judgment delivered in 280 characters.
Hi Ravi,
— pdawg (@prathamgrv) April 28, 2025
You failed the interview, were flagged during the background verification, and exposed as a misogynist.
Also failed as a decent human. No surprises here.
Cheers,
Recruitment Team https://t.co/9WkJfCyXcd pic.twitter.com/MVXvDK1iN2
Social Media or Surveillance Tool?
The drama didn’t end there. As reactions poured in, the internet quickly split into camps. While some sympathized with Kumar’s frustration over ghosting and the silence that plagues job applications, others championed Grover’s no-nonsense stance, lauding him for calling out problematic behavior.
Still, some found the recruiter’s approach excessive. “Why was a background check needed for a candidate who failed the interview?” one user asked. Another chimed in: “Checking someone’s personal X handle for background checks is very weird.” But for others, the message was clear — digital footprints matter.
Recruiter’s Justification: “Skills Can Be Nurtured, Behaviour Can’t”
To further clarify his public takedown, Grover later posted an extended tweet explaining his actions. According to him, Kumar was being considered for a bounty assignment despite not acing the interview. The team had even added him to a shortlist out of courtesy. However, his public criticism soured the equation.
Grover explained that upon revisiting Kumar’s timeline, he noticed a pattern of “hateful, entitled, and toxic” behavior. “He acts like recruiters owe him a favour,” Grover wrote, adding that professionalism doesn’t end with a follow-up email — it includes humility and respect.
“Skills can be nurtured. Behaviour can’t. That’s not my job,” he concluded, underscoring the importance of attitude in the hiring process.
Clearing the air from the last post -
— pdawg (@prathamgrv) April 29, 2025
We were planning to offer him a bounty assignment since his interview didn’t go well. The final shortlist was already made, and we still added him in but he didn’t have the patience and decided to take it public.
After that, I went through…
A Lesson in Online Etiquette?
The digital spat has sparked a wider conversation: where do we draw the line between professional critique and personal responsibility? With social media now playing an unspoken role in hiring assessments, applicants may need to weigh every post, comment, and retweet like a line on their résumé.
While companies are being urged to be more transparent and responsive during hiring, candidates are being reminded — loudly and publicly — that how you present yourself online could speak louder than your CV.
In an age where professional and personal personas often blur, this viral encounter might just be the wake-up call jobseekers and recruiters alike didn’t know they needed.
Would you hire someone based on their timeline?
You may also like
What is Pope League? TikToker creates viral fantasy game around papal conclave
BREAKING: Co-op shuts down part of IT system after hack attempt as it issues store update
Home Bargains brings back 'stunning' £20 viral lamp shoppers 'need'
From Kabul to Kashmir, Tehran to London: How Pakistan's deep state fuels global terror
"Cannot decide who real target is...": Jairam Ramesh slams BJP over handling of Pahalgam terror attack
