[AndyKelley]

Warning: I had a close friend apply for this position about a year back and it was a bit sketchy. They said remote in the posting and then on the phone said the position was on-site. Additionally they said a salary number on the posting, and then on the phone said a lower number, with a promise to raise salary to the previous number after some amount of time. Then they lowered the number again in a second phone call.

[mocatta]

Sincere apologies to your friend. At that point we were bootstrapping, and had been for a year. We had a fundraise coming together but the amount and timing were at that point unknown, hence lack of specificity regarding salary early on. We have since closed funding so things have been firmed up.

As for on-site vs remote we've always been happy to do remote for the right candidate but prefer on-site. We have in the past and continue to have a few remote employees.

[hayd]

"bootstrapping" is a shitty excuse for changing the salary expectations mid-way through the process.

[mocatta]

From the perspective of a couple of engineer founders who went back and forth between two drastically different termsheets over the course of a few months of negotiations, it was either stick with a figure that relied on a deal we were leaning against, or share the most accurate picture at that point in time. It seems hard to justify acting differently, given the situation.