> I’m not surprised that HN rushes to discredit the idea that hiring is not a perfect meritocracy, but this is kinda silly. I think this is a straw man argumen

> I’m not surprised that HN rushes to discredit the idea that hiring is not a perfect meritocracy, but this is kinda silly. I think this is a straw man argument, unless you can point to more than one person here (now I see none) arguing hiring is a perfect meritocracy. I see lots of people questioning the methodology and conclusions drawn, but I don't see anyone claiming hiring is perfectly meritocratic. On the one hand, if we need to perfectly understand the problem before starting to solve it, we'll be forever stuck in analysis. On the other hand, if we are incorrect in our initial analysis, we risk wasting time and other resources on the wrong solutions, reducing resources available for other solutions further down the road. It's very important to distinguish constructive criticism from animosity.