‘John, content writer rejection’: Candidate replies after recruiter leaves AI prompt in rejection email

The content strategist whose rejection email arrived with the AI prompt still attached has followed up, replying to the same email thread to point out the error, copying the hiring manager, and closing with the very line that had been left in the original message: “Keeping the tone polite but firm.”

The original post, about a four-month wait for a rejection that included the leftover instruction to “insert the candidate’s email address” and a reference to a “rejection email for John, content writer rejection,” drew far more responses than the poster expected. Many urged a reply. This update says they sent one and are now second-guessing it.

What the reply said

The email, shown in a screenshot with names redacted, was courteous but pointed. The poster thanked the recruiter for the update, then flagged that the message had the AI prompt attached at the bottom, including the placeholder for the candidate’s email address and the note about John. “I’m assuming John is a template name and not the person who was actually supposed to receive this; either way, it made for an interesting read,” they wrote.

They made clear they were not appealing the decision. “I’ve already moved on from this opportunity,” the email said. But they noted that they had applied for a content role, and that had they got it, “I’d have been the one writing these emails. I’d like to think I would have caught the placeholder before hitting send.”

The manager was copied “just so the team is aware of the template issue. Hopefully, this helps streamline the process for the next batch of candidates.” The email closed: “Keeping the tone polite but firm.”

Why they didn’t escalate

The poster said they chose not to tag the CEO or publicly name the company, and did not want a back-and-forth over it. They framed the error as human rather than systemic: “at least he prompted it and copy-pasted it himself instead of setting up some fully automated system that would’ve done the same thing without a human noticing.”

They acknowledged the wider context too. “People are already losing their jobs to AI, the economy is bad and everyone is struggling to get hired (mostly because of recruiters like these).” The cc to the manager, they said, was aimed at helping other candidates avoid months of waiting for a rejection.

There has been no reply yet. The poster admitted the sign-off might be “a bit too much,” adding, “can’t unsend it now can I (pettyyy).”

They also wrote the response they would like to receive: “Absolutely, and you’re right to push back. I had inadvertently picked up a prior template, and that’s on me. It’s not a mistake. It’s an email with an origin story.” This was a jab at how AI LLMs typically respond when you point out mistakes that they may have missed.

What Reddit said

The thread largely backed the sign-off. “I’m cackling at the ‘keeping the tone polite but firm’ signature at the bottom,” one commenter wrote. Another agreed: “I actually love the sign-off. It’s not over the top, it’s the perfect amount.”

Not everyone thought the reply was worth sending. “Please do not give these companies that reject you your time by pointing out their mistakes,” one commenter argued, a view that reflects a common instinct among job seekers to disengage after a rejection.

Another shared a similar experience that suggests the problem is not isolated: “I got an email addressed to ‘CustomerTokenName’. They really don’t give a [expletive].”

Read also: ‘The resume was never read’: Job seeker rejected just two minutes after applying