This question (Dealing with an employee that went over my head) has been linked to the deleted question (How should I go over my supervisor's head (before I've even started) without creating a bad impression?).

I do not like the fact that all of the answers failed to consider what might have prompted the employee to ask for such a thing in the first place. I suspect there is a really good reason as I cannot imagine doing such a thing and being let go (which is easy to do prior to day 1) for a trivial reason.

The deleted question (not created by me) called attention to this omission.

  • Related: workplace.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4425/2322
    – enderland
    Commented Mar 29, 2017 at 2:09
  • Well, related yes. But destroying the hypothetical and leaving the point it called unaddressed is really bad. I can't give a better answer to the question than given, but even leaving this obvious counter question with only bad answers makes the fact the high-voted answers are incomplete obvious.
    – Joshua
    Commented Mar 29, 2017 at 2:14

2 Answers 2


87921 was deleted at the request of the original poster, so, yes, it was justified.


I can't quite tell what you're asking for here. The deleted question was closed (as a duplicate), so it couldn't get any more answers. The OP requested deletion, and while we don't generally delete questions with significantly-upvoted answers, we're more willing in cases like this.

The first question you linked to is not on hold. If you don't like any of the answers, please write a new one. This is the best way to share an alternate approach. (Do be sure to answer the question; it sounds like you don't like the current answers, but "they're wrong" by itself isn't an answer. An alternate approach is, though.)

Beyond that, the tool to signal disagreement with an answer is the downvote.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .