2 ms·
The charge stuck out to me too. My immediate reaction was that making developers pay a fee to be searchable doesn't seem to be turning the job market on its he
by roc 17y ago
The charge stuck out to me too.
My immediate reaction was that making developers pay a fee to be searchable doesn't seem to be turning the job market on its head at all.
I don't know if there's a non-slimy way to take money from developers when your stated goal is to help developers make money. It comes off sounding like any other job-assistance scam, where they take $20 to drop a resume into a template and spam it to X-hundred companies.
If you only want serious job applicants, you could just require the developer to check in every now and again.
And if this were really turning the market on its head it would need to provide developers far more information that they could use to get a leg up during negotiation and assessment. Developers would need to see things like: who's looking at their resume, what salary range they're looking in, team sizes, technologies in use, what search terms brought them to your name, what other developers they looked at, how many positions they're trying to fill, etc.
- netcan 17y agoI don't know if there's a non-slimy way to take money from developers when your stated goal is to help developers make money. Come one. I dig free too. Maybe it's even better if it's free. But you can't just disqualify any attempt to charge for a service as slimy. $20 to post a resume if it might connect you to a job you want is nothing. There is nothing wrong with charging developers (or anyone else) when your stated aim is to help them make money. In fact, that is a very normal way of doing business. Charge money for something that is valuable because it helps you make money.