this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
267 points (98.9% liked)

You Should Know

41641 readers
136 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated. We are not here to ban people who said something you don't like.

If you file a report, include what specific rule is being violated and how.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

One is bonkers but all are slippery slope in how the answers will be used to eliminate canidates (meant to post this last month but sorta forgot):

  1. How has your commitment to the Constitution and the founding principles of the United States inspired you to pursue this role within the Federal government? Provide a concrete example from professional, academic, or personal experience.

  2. In this role, how would you use your skills and experience to improve government efficiency and effectiveness? Provide specific examples where you improved processes, reduced costs, or improved outcomes.

  3. How would you help advance the President's Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.

  4. How has a strong work ethic contributed to your professional, academic or personal achievements? Provide one or two specific examples, and explain how those qualities would enable you to serve effectively in this position.

top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 16 hours ago

Id love to believe this is to weed out the bad applicants.
People that answer "lol, I just want a job" actually get the interviews

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Would you work tirelessly and with little personal benefit to help promote and spread fascism in America under a convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, and traitor to our nation?

[–] Prox@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Who the fuck is gonna write four bullshit mini-essays just for a shot at job that pays well below market rate?

[–] BigPotato@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

Federal Jobs are (previously) stable and offer good benefits. Pay is lower but you get guaranteed days off and clear expectations for work.

[–] GlenRambo@jlai.lu 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who writes anything these days. Its all AI bro.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

you actually have to check a statement that you did not use ai in the process.

[–] GlenRambo@jlai.lu 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Thatll surely trip them up. /s

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago

its kinda funny given how its integrated into so many search engines now.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago

I am but honestly its kinda for spite and once you have a response you don't really need to adjust it for each job. My constitution one focuses on the importance of the bill of rights especially the first half dozen.

[–] normalexit@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

I think that's the point. They want people to be let go and not be replaced. If they can get some loyalists in the role instead, even better.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 43 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How are you supposed to support the Constitution and the President’s executive orders at the same time?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 day ago

That's exactly how they only get sycophants.

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 137 points 2 days ago (3 children)

How has your commitment to the Constitution and the founding principles of the United States inspired you to pursue this role within the Federal government? Provide a concrete example from professional, academic, or personal experience.

How would you help advance the President's Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.

You can either have a commitment to the Constitution, or to the president's unconstitutional EOs. Not both.

[–] arin@lemmy.world 73 points 2 days ago

That's how they filter out applicants

[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 37 points 2 days ago

That's why it's called doublethink.

Woah there, stop using your brain

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 74 points 2 days ago

Christ on a cracker. Answering these questions must feel like cosplaying in a Civil War re-enactment, as a Confederate.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

It’s one or the other. you are either committed to the constitution or you believe in the pedo kings unconstitutional royal decrees

[–] darkmarx@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Number 1 is a little weird as most people wouldn't be able to name many founding principles of the united states. It's something that's still debated. Hell, the founders weren't even in agreement on them.

Number 2 is worded strangely, but isn't too bad. It's like asking how you made concrete improvements at your last employer and how you can utilize that with the new one.

Number 4 isn't bad. It could be from any application at any company.

Number 3 is freaking bonkers. Think about applying for a job as a park photographer at Disney and being asked how you'll help fulfill the CEO's direction to make another Star Wars sequel. After being asked to name the priorities to begin with.

[–] Horsecook@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

most people wouldn’t be able to name many founding principles of the united states.

You think most Americans aren’t familiar with

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[–] darkmarx@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's from a declaration of war, not the principles of the government. At least use "We the People" as that's the constitution. Even that isn't the same as the founding principles as it has been amended. The first 10 coming soon after writing.

Small independent governments that come together in times of need or one centralized government that handles the needs of all states? Thirteen independent economies or one for all thirteen states? Religion? Guns? President for life? A large percentage of the population being counted as on 3/5 of a person? These are principles of the founding of the country, many are debated to this day. And you will find many who agree with each side. There is a large portion of the population that argue the government was founded on Christian values. So no, I don't think most people can adequately explain the founding principles of the United States other than "ma freedum."

[–] Horsecook@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You’re moving the goalposts.

[–] darkmarx@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

Not at all, it was an explanation of the goal post, not moving it.

My assertion (goal post if you like): The first question is weird as the founding principles of the united states are vauge and vary depending on points of view.

My explanation (which was somehow construed as moving the goal post): The founding of the United States had conflicting goals, principles, intentions, and ideas; many of which are still debated today.

My conclusion: It would be difficult for the average person to give concrete examples of meeting those principles as the constitution is fluid and the most common thing people call a founding principle is "freedom."

As far as the declaration of war part. "We hold these truths..." is from the Declaration of Independence. Where as "We the people..." is from the constitution. The former says all men are created equal. The latter says some men are only worth 3/5 of others. I mentioned it as another example of the contradictions in the founding of the country. So, if you are to answer a question about founding principles, which do you choose?

All this to say, the first question is meaningless unless the answer is just surface level.

[–] stelelor@lemmy.ca 38 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What if I choose another president's EO's and policy initiatives? The question doesn't restrict itself to only 45/47.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 11 points 2 days ago

yes I noticed this as well although he has some that are pretty general. Like the ai and cybersecurity initiative which you could see other presidents having signed.

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Huh, so he’s attempting to create a caste of conspicuously president-aligned workers. That seems like an interesting and not-at-all dangerous idea

[–] FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca 25 points 2 days ago

Attempting? Where TF have you been all year?

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I have received many rejections.

[–] drolex@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 days ago

You must be one of those scary members of the group known as Antifa!

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Whether good, evil or neutral, lawful people fuck with my head. They have no concept that someone would simply lie. They have no concept that anyone would consider cheating the system. Hell, I was on autopilot, starting to fabricate answers and think how I could bullshit my way through, and I have no intention of applying.

I want to grab these geniuses and ask what difference they think this will make. Said that sort of thing to management many times in my IT career. "Users are just going to circumvent that policy." "You think?" "I know." (Because I would.)

Porn site: Are you 18+

14-yo: Yes

Lol

Just say shit like: "Yes I support the President's executive order to deport people who are anti-American"

[Meaning: I support the deportation of elon musk]

😁

[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is North Korea, not North America, right?

Behold, it's the Democratic People's Republic of MAGAland

[–] SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

imo the questions about efficiency and commitment to the constitution isn't that crazy to ask upfront. If I remember right all federal employees have to swear an oath when they are hired. It also matches the one military officers say.

“I, ____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

But note that it makes no mention of loyalty to the President directly, unlike the oath of enlistment military enlisted members say (see below). That's what I find most odd about these questions on USAjobs and what I think is crossing a line leaning towards political loyalty over constitutional loyalty.

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yeah thats why I said one was bonkers and the rest were slipper slopes. The constitution is theoretically fine but allows for weeding out people who harp on the pesky bill of rights or such. Then given the doge debacle the word efficiency has negative cannotations really but again its that its so easy to weed out if the efficiency is about how more social services would actually reduce costs.

[–] SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago

Yeah I just wanted to emphazise your point

And I agree efficiency is about speeding things up without losing the quality of the end result. And I think anyone that has been to a BMV can see the need for that kind of change but that's not what they are after. They seem to just charge through the red tape and warning labels to do what they want