[v1l]

Your feedback is valid but looking at your bio, it's specific to your context.

I think you're way overqualified for most platforms/directories. It makes sense that you're represented by 10x. But between where you are and the early career dev, there are tens of thousands of devs who have good bit of experience and places they've worked at and yet have a hard time finding good work and relevant roles.

It's a myth that every experienced person has a strong network and lands their next gig/job through it. I'd say that only applies to 20% of devs. Most are still found by recruiters or apply cold.

I talked about the vetting part here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38997274

[gregjor]

You probably should have defined what you meant by strong experience. A directory of experienced developers implies some kind of selection and vetting process. Your vetting idea seems to come down to looking at LinkedIn. Don't you suppose that's what every recruiter already does?

I doubt you'll find many employers who think LinkedIn gives sufficient filters. Your whole directory idea assumes that LinkedIn doesn't have enough filtering or vetting, thus the need for a more selective directory.

I didn't write that "every experienced person has a strong network" or lands all of their jobs that way. I don't know how that breaks out percentage-wise and I hesitate to guess, but I'm not proposing yet another job or developer directory.

Good luck entering what seems a crowded field.

[v1l]

Fair criticism.

But the part I'm not understanding is that you seem imply that recruiters are better at selection/vetting than a directory or platform that's run by experienced engineers who are selecting other experienced engineers.

I also don't think this is an either/or. Most managers only care about quality candidates coming through the door. So there can be multiple solutions. This isn't a winner take all market by any means.

It's a crowded field so getting noticed will be a challenge.

[gregjor]

Good recruiters vet people, and jobs, and match them up. And good recruiters have relationships and inside tracks with employers. Not all recruiters, of course. Experienced developers, on the other hand, have little incentive to vet their peers, and may do a worse job than a good recruiter because they will focus on different things. Developers and employers have different definitions of quality, in other words.

Of course "managers only care about quality candidates coming through the door," or at least they care a lot about that. But you have to define what you mean by "quality candidates" and how you have an efficient way to identify those candidates and put them in front of potential employers. You can just say that people in your directory have experience and got vetted somehow, but I think you will have to do more than that to stand out and get credibility.

Many people have attacked this problem, including recruiters and agencies, and all kinds of job boards and lists of professionals seeking employment, from LinkedIn to more specialized or elite lists. If you have some new ideas, great.

You started this thread with a proposed directory for developers that would let the "opportunities can find them." Who pays in that model? How does an employer trust the directory? How is the directory maintained and vetted? How is it not LinkedIn, in other words?

[capr]

I've never met a good recruiter. The best ones hire experienced developers to talk to me.

[gregjor]

That means they either know how to identify an experienced developer, or they don’t but think they do.