Skip to content

100 Job Strategies · 36 of 100

Comment-Section Proximity

Six weeks of being visibly thoughtful before you ever send a message.

10K viewsLow effortPays off in 2-4 monthsCareer switchersExperienced candidatesAnyone with no networkPeople with a target company list
Share

In short

Leaving substantive comments under one hiring manager's posts for several weeks makes your name familiar before you ever contact them directly. Familiarity does the work a cold message cannot: by the time you write, you are not a stranger, you are the person whose comments they have been reading.

The situation

A cold message arrives from someone a hiring manager has never heard of. It is well written. It is deleted in four seconds, along with the eleven others like it.

A different name appears in their inbox. They recognise it immediately — this is the person who has been leaving genuinely useful comments under their posts for the past two months, including the one that disagreed with them about warehouse automation and turned out to be right.

The message is barely longer than the first one. It gets read, and answered.

Why this works

Cold outreach fails mostly because of an absence of context. The recipient has no way to distinguish a serious person from a mass-mailer, and the safe default is to ignore everything.

Sustained public commenting solves that before you ever ask for anything. Every thoughtful comment is a small, low-cost demonstration that you understand the field, that you have views, and that you can express them well. Repeated over weeks, it accumulates into something that functions like a reputation.

The psychological mechanism is familiarity. People consistently rate names they have encountered before as more trustworthy and more competent, regardless of the context of the encounter. You are not persuading anyone of anything; you are simply ceasing to be a stranger.

It is also public, which matters more than it first appears. Other people in that comment section — peers, colleagues, other hiring managers in the same field — are reading too. A good comment reaches an audience far beyond the person who wrote the post.

The cost is patience and discipline. Six weeks of contributing without asking for anything feels slow, and that is precisely why almost nobody does it. The people who do arrive at the eventual conversation with an advantage that cannot be manufactured quickly.

How to run it

  1. 1

    Pick three to five people, not thirty

    Hiring managers and senior practitioners in the specific area you want to work. A small, deliberate list you engage with properly beats scattered activity.

  2. 2

    Comment only when you have something to add

    Agreement with no content is noise. A relevant example, a respectful counterpoint, a piece of data or an extension of the argument is signal.

  3. 3

    Disagree occasionally and carefully

    Thoughtful disagreement is the most memorable kind of comment and the most likely to start a conversation. Do it on substance and without point-scoring.

  4. 4

    Keep comments short

    Three or four sentences. Long comments read as someone using another person's post as their own platform, which is the opposite of the effect you want.

  5. 5

    Do this for at least six weeks before contacting anyone

    The whole mechanism is accumulated familiarity. Messaging after two comments wastes the strategy and looks transparently instrumental.

  6. 6

    When you do write, reference the conversation

    One line acknowledging the exchanges places you instantly. You are picking up a conversation rather than starting one.

What to say

Copy, then make it yours
Hi Rasmus, We've gone back and forth a few times in the comments over the last couple of months — I'm the one who pushed back on your point about pick-rate metrics being a labour problem rather than a layout problem. Still think I was half right at best. I'm a warehouse operations lead and I'm starting to look for my next role. I've followed how you think about this for long enough to know I'd like to work somewhere that thinks about it the same way. If you're hiring, I'd welcome a conversation. If you're not, I'd still value a pointer towards who else in this space is worth talking to. Either way I'll keep arguing with your posts. — Hilde

When it does not work

  • Empty agreement. "Great post!" repeated for six weeks builds no reputation at all and may read as someone farming visibility.
  • Commenting on everything they post. Replying to every single post looks like monitoring rather than interest. Engage where you genuinely have something to say.
  • Making it about you. Comments that pivot to your own achievements or job search are read as advertising and undo the goodwill.
  • Aggressive disagreement. Public correction that embarrasses someone is memorable for the wrong reasons. Disagree with the idea, never the person.
  • Expecting speed. This takes months and produces nothing measurable in the meantime. Run it alongside faster strategies rather than instead of them.
The takeaway

A cold message from a stranger competes with the delete key. A message from the person whose comments they have been reading for two months does not.

Questions

How long before I can message them?

At least six weeks of genuine, intermittent engagement, and longer is better. The entire mechanism is accumulated familiarity, which cannot be compressed: messaging after two or three comments produces the same result as a cold message while also making the earlier comments look calculated in hindsight. Treat the timeline as the cost of the strategy rather than an obstacle to it, and run faster approaches in parallel while it matures.

What makes a comment substantive rather than noise?

Adding something the post did not contain: a concrete example from your own experience, a relevant piece of data, a respectful counterpoint, or an extension of the argument into a case the author did not consider. Agreement with no content contributes nothing and, repeated, reads as visibility farming. A useful test is whether someone reading only your comment would learn something, or whether it merely signals that you were present.

Is disagreeing with someone I want to work for risky?

Thoughtful disagreement is usually the most valuable kind of comment you can leave, provided it is about substance and carries no personal edge. Senior practitioners who post publicly are generally looking for engagement rather than applause, and a well-argued counterpoint is far more memorable than assent. What causes damage is public correction that embarrasses the author, point-scoring, or disagreement on matters where you are visibly less informed than they are.

Does this work on any platform?

It works wherever the person you are targeting genuinely participates rather than merely broadcasts. Professional networks are the obvious venue, but industry forums, technical communities, mailing lists and comment sections on industry publications all function the same way and are frequently less crowded. The requirement is that the individual reads and responds to comments, so check whether they actually engage before investing weeks in a channel they ignore.

Build your free Drivetube Profile
Share

More from 100 Job Strategies

See all 100 in this series