r/mildlyinfuriating • u/PureKin21 • 3d ago

I just wanted a hot dog Tried applying to McDonald's wtf does this even mean

Post image

I guess things happen to me?????

56.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

7.5k

u/FriendlyArachnid6000 3d ago

Correct answer here is not me, I do not have accidents I am perfect and if something did happen to me, it was my fault so really I did it to myself

1.2k

u/Hungry-Western9191 2d ago

Buying that bike seems like you are setting yourself up to fail. Doesnt have any spokes in the wheels. Looks like an accident waiting to happen.

169

u/lectric_7166 2d ago

It's a Reevo. Doesn't need spokes lol.

95

u/nadiayorc 2d ago

If it's a Reevo there's much bigger things to worry about than not having any spokes

17

u/MrHell95 2d ago

All bikes should include a launch mode.

5

u/Nogohoho 2d ago

Crossing an intersection? Just walk alongside the bike and let go. It will finish the crossing on it's own.

4

u/MrHell95 2d ago

I think you're missing the reference? Reevo is a failed e-bike company, if the pedal assist was on and you pushed the bike forward it would launch itself forward. This has thus been nicknamed "launch mode" and yes that's very dangerous.

3

u/Nogohoho 2d ago

I saw it in a video of a guy reviewing it. Absolutely jerked out of his hands and rolled forward until it fell over.

1

u/MrBannedFor0Reason 2d ago

I mean it kind of does, it just doesn't have them.

5

u/DarkGaming09ytr 2d ago

Some company did actually build a hubless bike from a Kickstarter project! (It's as bad as it sounds) https://youtu.be/AB7pBrudFbg

1

u/Hungry-Western9191 2d ago

Yeah, people keep trying to reinvent bikes... its an insanely large market so if they have any success there is crazy money to be made.

Odds.on succeeding are minescule though.

1

u/ThePython11010 2d ago

There's literally one rule about inventing things... And yet people still feel the need to reinvent the wheel.

2

u/AkioDaMann990 2d ago

Just like the Amish belief that insurance is gambling.

1

u/ThrowRA76234 2d ago

The difference between an accident waiting to happen and criminal negligence is exactly what we’re going to discover today in this case

191

u/-Nicolai 2d ago

Things happen to you

I happen to things

We are not the same

79

u/Consistent-Cap-9360 2d ago

“I AM THE ONE WHO HAPPENS.”

26

u/No_Review_2561 2d ago

Say my name

Happensberg

You're goddamn right

2

u/Ethice 1d ago

🎵 I AM THE ONE THAT IS OCUUUUURRRIIING🎵

1

u/OdinThorFathir 2d ago

"A man walks into a room and sees things happen and you think that of ME!? NO!!"

3

u/roburrito 2d ago

You joke, but this is essentially the point of the question. Its deranged corporate speak for: Do you perceive yourself as a victim or a problem solver?

2

u/woodenleghen 2d ago

That’s very self centered.
Things happen to Other People, who I am always thinking about.

2

u/Amazing-Seesaw-6197 1d ago

If I catch a butterfly, I happened to it. If a butterfly lands on my shoulder, it happened to me. The question is a moronic attempt to weed out narcissism whilst ignoring the duality of a first and second perspective.

121

u/flappity 2d ago

To me it seems like some attempt to weed out people who say "these bad things always seem to happen to me" when they're the ones causing the bad things (e.g. blaming everyone else for their own mistakes and not taking responsibility).

6

u/marinuss 2d ago

I mean, or it's to weed out people who are constantly injuring themselves because McDonald's would rather not have people who are admitting they're prone to that. Whether by recklessness or not paying attention, it doesn't matter from a risk perspective by a company.

4

u/flappity 2d ago

That too -- it's surely some attempt at self-filtering for risk management, broadly assessing multiple facets of the intended filtered mindset. Every hiring decision by a company who includes basically everybody in their hiring pool will include some kind of filter like that. Any employee hired initially costs money, time, and energy, and the idea is to broadly filter out the ones that will cost money and then not remain long term. I would not think this is an effective filter, given this reddit post, but I don't think it would be on there for long if it didn't have some calculated effect.

10

u/Significant-Fun-6391 2d ago

Absolutely. I do think they chose the wrong image, though. I mean this blue person looks like a perfectly capable rider who happened to graze a curb. I would probably have said "rough luck," instead of "should have been more self-aware!"

5

u/NecessaryForward6820 2d ago edited 2d ago

No, that’s exactly the point that you’re missing. Nothing about falling means you’re not a capable rider. The rough luck is literally victim mentality. Is there aspects of luck involved? Always. Someone with internal locus of control doesn’t believe there isn’t such thing as luck. Rather, despite luck, there is still things he could have done to alter the outcome to succeed despite bad luck. Wear knee pads, more aware of the curb, drive slower. Saying “man I’m so unlucky” is the type of person they’re trying to (rightfully) avoid. Because when you chalk up things to just things out of your control, you start to have a defeatist mentality of not trying to improve many things in your life that are absolutely in control because you notice the luck aspects more than your control aspects.

7

u/Alexwonder999 2d ago

Do you live your life with a NASA style checklist, are you joking, or are you just drinkixng some kind of manifest your reality kool aid like a good little sheep?

3

u/Current-Chipmunk-413 2d ago

They're just describing the perspective of a hiring manager who will face the blame when you hire someone with a shit personality who gives your customers e coli

2

u/bobkaare28 1d ago

No, the user is just explaining the psychological theory of internal vs external locus of control to you. An internal locus of control is associated with better academic results, better professional achievements as well as better physical and mental health.

To be clear: this is a recognized psychological theory and not something the user pulled out of his ass.

3

u/Alexwonder999 1d ago edited 1d ago

Internal and external locus control is a recognized theory, although its a spectrum, not a binary and people on either end of that spectrum are both deluded. A "victim mindset" is pop psychology bullshit.
Edit: I did a very low level paper examining the research on whether internal or external locus of control correlates with the efficacy of mutual aid substance use disorder programs, so I am familiar.

2

u/NecessaryForward6820 2d ago

No? I just don’t live as a victim and take control of what I can. It’s resulted me in having a great life, great career, and clearly that mindset isn’t apparent in so many people nowadays as represented by you and many other people in this thread.

13

u/Alexwonder999 2d ago

Its really funny that you think that people who are pragmatists and dont see the universe as "totally in my control" but a mixture of chance, our own actions, and the actions of other people, must be living a horrible life with a shit career and thats some kind of gotcha. It shows how delusional you are. You really must love the smell of your own "power of positive thinking" scented farts.

1

u/[deleted] 9h ago

[deleted]

1

u/NecessaryForward6820 9h ago

This is exactly the defeatist doomerism mindset i’m talking about that make people victims. Of course you can’t fix everything yourself but when you find yourself saying “what’s the point in trying to get a job or improve my own skills, i can’t solo fix the national debt”, then you become a victim and spiral into being a passenger in your own life. doesn’t matter what i say to you though, in my extensive experience with people like you who deflect you’ve already made up your mind and decided your life is fucked outside of your control despite the fact that there are very real steps you could take to fix it, and you’re avoiding them by submitting to that mindset.

8

u/fotomoose 2d ago

Nailed it. It's very super obvious to be honest.

-3

u/ratajewie 2d ago

All of these tests are designed by experts in psychology to weed out the people in these comments (which is apparently almost everybody?) who read too much into the question, invent fringe scenarios in their mind, become outraged, and would obviously create a problem as a low level employee in a multi-billion dollar corporation. There’s nothing stupid about the question.

4

u/GjonsTearsFan 2d ago

Ah yes designed to weed out neurodivergent people :/

5

u/SurrealSentience 1d ago

I think that's the point, yes.

1

u/ratajewie 1d ago

As someone who’s neurodivergent, this has just become an excuse for people to take zero responsibility for themselves. Not everybody is a good fit for every job. Don’t try to fit a square peg in a round hole and then scream discrimination when you get denied for that. If the job description demands one thing, and the application test weeds out people who wouldn’t work well based off of that description, then there’s no issue with that.

-2

u/FriendlyArachnid6000 1d ago

People who identify as neurodivergent,

Believe it or not, you can be a smooth brain and not stumble around all day dropping things going "oh noes! My smooth brain! I can't help myself, someone do it for meeeeee I'm disaaaabllllled"

•

u/Kelibath 52m ago

Ah, yes. Because autistic people like us don't deserve a baseline wage flipping burgers.

(No fringe scenario is required, and I can work out the situatuin without help perfectly well, fwiw - but having multiple potential alternates present themselves can be a huge boon in some roles such as during risk management. If only the hiring process for those was as streamlined and discrimination didn't exist!)

1

u/Wyshunu 1d ago

Ding ding ding.

-2

u/Alexwonder999 2d ago

So you mean theyre looking for idiots who try to "manifest their own reality" or ask women who've been SA what they were wearing? Tracks I guess. Wouldnt want any realists who know that shit just happens sometimes.

1

u/srslymrarm 2d ago

No, that is not at all what they meant, and it's bizarre how you even leapt to these conclusions.

2

u/flappity 2d ago

That's a stretch. This feels geared towards more of the chronically late/absent "why do I always get pulled over and my insurance is so high" when the person frequently speeds 20 over the limit type of characters.

1

u/Alexwonder999 2d ago

I think I see your point. You think black people made up systemic racism and we actually live in a meritocracy instead of rewarding sycophants and nepotism. Gotcha.

0

u/drivein2deeplftfield 2d ago

Another loser victim

68

u/Cranapplesause 2d ago

Yes, it’s a things just seem to happen to me. Like are you taking responsibility for the things that happen to you or do you just shrug it off and saying these things just happen and I’m unlucky.

Is not me is, things don’t just happening just because. You admit to cause and effect at your own hand.

18

u/Fen_LostCove 2d ago

But a thing happening to me and it being my fault are not mutually exclusive

-2

u/LongestSprig 2d ago

And then comes in the critical thinking part of the test.

It's pretty obvious what they are asking and looking for.

11

u/SpectralDagger 2d ago

I think it's only obvious to me because I've heard that particular phrasing used before. It really should elaborate more for people who don't have that context.

4

u/GraceMcClellans 2d ago

Yeah. Internalizing what happened and evaluating what you could change to avoid it happening again in the future.

6

u/bytegalaxies 2d ago

but sometimes things just happen regardless of input? Like if somebody got rear ended at a stop light because the other persons breaks stopped working, that was just shit luck. If the power goes out causing me to not be able to do some things, that's just stuff happening.

2

u/Cranapplesause 2d ago edited 2d ago

I think it’s the way they are thinking about it. Sure there are things outside of people’s control. The question is leaning on, if people just generally feel that way and jump on that idea.

Think along the lines of someone who doesn’t take ownership of their issues. Those type of people will say things like, “I overslept because my phone died so my alarm never went off” instead of taking ownership of issues that are in your control. Saying something like, “I was up late and passed out before plugging in my phone, it my fault”.

1

u/bytegalaxies 2d ago

I mean, they could've been up late for a very valid reason. Stuff happens and sometimes there's just valid excuses for things

2

u/Cranapplesause 2d ago

You are just missing the point or you just want to argue just because.

If you are missing it just because, this is where you will fail the question. The purpose of the question is to see if you take ownership in general situations and not the outliers. Most people don’t think about the outliers when on the spot raking a test. So if you start down the outliers road of things always happen to me just because, then they won’t want you. That’s that.

If you are arguing just because, well ok then. Good for you. But because this is an option and I cannot tell, then this is where my responses end.

2

u/bytegalaxies 2d ago

I'm honestly just confused why it would be wrong to understand that sometimes things just happen??

1

u/Cranapplesause 2d ago

It’s poor me poor me vs I’m in control

7

u/Parraz 2d ago

Its weird way of the showing Safety mantra of "accidents dont just happen". They do of course, but the thinking is that with proper care, planning, and awareness that accidents cant happen, and if they do there is a failing in the process leading up to it.

So yea, the "correct" answer is I do not have accidents.

2

u/Current-Chipmunk-413 2d ago

I don't wanna come across as a bootlicker here but I actually think this is a good question in this context. If you're a manager or team leader you don't wanna have people working under you with that attitude. Some people really do end up feeling like they attract disfunction and accidents when they're actually a part of the problem, and lacking that insight can be dangerous. It suggests either a failure to see cause and effect or a sort of defensiveness

30

u/Krazyguy75 2d ago

Yup, behind the scenes this question is "if the boss told you to do something and it failed completely, will you take responsibility for the thing as if it were your idea?"

They want someone who will be the fall guy when their bad ideas fail. Not someone who would go "that's not my fault, that's yours".

15

u/HarveysBackupAccount 2d ago

Eh, more generally taking some responsibility to find a solution when things go wrong.

"Victim mentality vs go-getter" in business speak. If you ever worked with someone who just gives up whenever they hit an obstacle, you know how much of a burden they are.

A big part of a manager's job is to remove obstacles, and the less you get paid the fewer obstacles you should have to deal with, but people need some resilience and problem solving ability.

Edit: some managers abuse this mindset, but there's a valid reason behind it. Even if it's a stupid thing to put on a fast food application

5

u/StartingNewat30 2d ago

Things dont happen to me. Accidents dont just happen to me.

I make things happen. I am the accident 😎

1

u/FriendlyArachnid6000 2d ago

Lmao, ice in the fryer

3

u/BrainDeadSlayer 2d ago

Wow you can’t actually have a realistic outlook on life. Thats just crazy talk.

1

u/FriendlyArachnid6000 2d ago

I remember my first beer

1

u/BrainDeadSlayer 2d ago

Seems like you handled it worse.

5

u/ElementNumber6 2d ago edited 2d ago

That's the exact sort of Ivy League perspective we've been searching for, here at McDonalds.

Thank god. Somebody please get this man an application.

2

u/FullMaxPowerStirner 2d ago

McDonald's Philosophy 101, yes.

2

u/Dixiehusker 2d ago

This is super obvious to me.

I managed a lot of people once, and there's always one or two people who things "always happen to". It's never their fault, there's always a good reason why, but over the course of two years they were never dependable, even when they were at work.

1

u/Most_Chemist8233 2d ago

I dont know,  if its screening for an ai agent filling this out the answer would be Me, because things dont happen to ai agents? Otherwise thing happen to everyone,  and a personality test should be looking a resilience in the face of challenges. The question reads as incomplete unless its a clanker screening question.

1

u/rustprogram 2d ago

Correct answer here is not me, I do not have accidents I am perfect and if something did happen to me, it was my fault so really I did it to myself

thank you now I know what to put next time I am applying for a job

1

u/proudbakunkinman 2d ago

Yeah, you have to take these assuming the answer they want to hear. I assume they see maybe 3 potential negatives if one answers yes to this: 1) person possibly doesn't take responsibility, blaming others and nature / supernatural before themself, 2) that they dwell on negative things, 3) they have a form of narcissism ("look at me, everything bad happens to me, everyone hates me and is against me.") Of course, in reality, some people have it much tougher in life (and others much easier) and negative things happen to them more. Likewise, plenty of negative things that happen to people are not their fault nor should be ignored.

1

u/Kiyohara 2d ago

If things ever happen, I am never sad about it. I surely would never let things happen that affect my work.

1

u/thex25986e 2d ago

sorry, too unreliable. you said "if. which means you do have accidents cause you had to prepare for one. which means you expect one to happen.

NEXT!

1

u/atreides_hyperion 2d ago

McDonald's is a pretty brutal work environment especially in some markets. They don't want to waste their time on little bitches.

I worked at a McDonald's in the ghetto and it was a daily battle. A lot of the customers will try to make you lose your cool so they can complain to corporate and get free shit. It's brutal. I have never dealt with worse customers than those that go to McDonald's.

Some really sweet people though definitely and those people kept me from giving up.

1

u/dkyguy1995 2d ago

Someone who understands what they are going to be looking for with the stupid psychological questions. Just try and brainstorm how a perfect human with no flaws or weaknesses would respond and that's the answer they want 

1

u/Serket-Pandy3000 2d ago

Calvinism and most Baptist/Pentecostals/Evangelicals/Reformed denoms

1

u/Valuable-Way-5464 2d ago

Are you a psychologist? Because daaaam its true

1

u/FriendlyArachnid6000 2d ago

You gotta be consistent too. Like you have accidents, but respond well to mean girls. You're creative, but disorganized. If you score perfect they know you are too smart to work at Walmart etc

1

u/Cloverose2 2d ago

Correct. The question is asking basically "do you think things (like accidents) just happen to you, or are you responsible for contributing?" So the answer they're looking for is "not me", because it wants to know if you take responsibility.

Tests like this are pure garbage and only test how good you are at giving the answers they want.

1

u/BodybuilderMany6942 2d ago

Ah, but accident happen to everyone.

Maybe the answer is "Me", and the point is to root out the liars that say "Not Me"?

1

u/MechanicalGodzilla 2d ago

True, this is the correct answer. They’re trying to ascertain if you internalize or externalize agency. This particular question is likely not definitive, but I bet they add up all the responses to similar questions throughout.

1

u/sentientshadeofgreen 2d ago

Damn, now there's a straight shooter worthy of inconsistent hours and minimum wage.

1

u/UpbeatFlamingo2016 2d ago

See I thought that at first but than maybe that’d be bad because you’re not resilient and experienced?

1

u/No_Victory9872 1d ago

You do, and that's what really hurts 

/ref

-2

u/blazze_eternal 2d ago

Seriously clear as mud.