> Your post constrains another misunderstanding about the hiring process: The goal isn’t to hire the first person through the system who is good enough to pass

> Your post constrains another misunderstanding about the hiring process: The goal isn’t to hire the first person through the system who is good enough to pass some arbitrary threshold. The goal is collect a number of candidates and hire the best one. People hate this reality, but it’s true. I definitely do not have any misunderstanding here, and my description of hiring is the same as what you wrote, just in different phrasing: after a period of time, the company has to pick a candidate, presumably the best one by their interview signals. I am disputing the standard claim of "it's better to have false negatives than false positives" by pointing out how that mindset does not work: since you have to choose someone anyway, the whole "avoiding false positives" might not be a thing at all