[edoceo]

I'm actively working to improve things in the hiring space, and "ghosting" is problem that only non-payers (who are still a key-component of revenue) face.

The balance is such for every gig there are at least dozens of applicants (supply) who are qualified - and this supply shifts over time - and this supply has urgent demand.

Ghosting is currently not a top issue for managers or recruiters. I don't see how name-and-shame changes that at all.

[mandelbrotwurst]

To say nothing of whether it's appropriate or fair, "name-and-shame" can certainly change dynamics because people generally want to avoid reputational harm.

That said, this service isn't actually doing that - it's sending anonymous notes to the alleged bad actor in private, which of course wouldn't have that effect.