Rethinking Triplebyte

This is a perfect example of why we're making these changes (and the problem that came from us being a gatekeeper). There are lots of different ways to show skill. We don't want to be in the position of deciding who "deserves" a job.

I'm salty towards the platform because they rejected me a few years ago, and my ego has barred me from using them again despite their outreach. I was also very unhappy when I heard about the public profiles. I don't want people to see that I interviewed poorly, or to have any kind of public record of that. I'm a decent engineer, I swear!

I had some bad luck. My nodejs build broke after a recent update on my machine, which I didn't realize until right before the interview. During a test with a different language, I tried to define a constant with the same name as a built-in function and ran into a vague compiler error (something about missing parentheses, ugh). This language has case-insensitive function names to compound the confusion. I unfortunately looked up how to define a constant in the docs. Their conclusion was that "I was uncomfortable in the language," despite having used it for 10 years. There was some other feedback which I felt was inaccurate, I think I just had a bad day, and obviously didn't convey my knowledge and experience well. I could see why a recruiter would hard pass on me for some of the stumbles, since their main goal is to forward candidates who interview well. It hurt to get rejected.

> Without passing the minimum bar, how does Triplebyte distinguish itself from other 1000 platforms where people post resumes?

We still have the quiz, and we still show performance on it prominently on your profile (provided you've chosen to share those scores). In fact, we've put a lot of energy into improving the trust companies place in our quizzes over the past year precisely because we think that skills data is important.

> Also, dissing those who have passed the bar as "engineers who like tests" is disrespectful. When they first launched, passing the bar makes you (in their words) a highly qualified engineer, and now passing the bar means nothing except that you only "like tests"...lol

Heh, yeah, that's fair, at least to a point.

Our quizzes are predictive. We know this from a lot of objective data, it's what you'd expect subjectively, and companies do tell us that they trust and value that data. That does not mean that our tests have no bias towards certain personality types. Different people respond differently to testing, and that does have a differential effect, not because our tests are bad but because testing is inherently somewhat artificial.

I actually taught test prep before joining Triplebyte years ago, so I've been this first-hand: it was not uncommon for a student who'd been doing well in practice sessions to crumple under the pressure of the real thing. That doesn't mean the test is bad, it just means that some people fare better on tests than others for reasons other than just their raw ability. When we say "likes tests", that's more what we mean: not that that's the only reason someone does well on a test, but that people who perform well in isolated, pressured environments do better relative to their skills than others.

I worked at Triplebyte several years ago (but way before any of these changes were being discussed - this blog post is the first I'm hearing of them). I'm an engineer, but I spent a lot of time with the account management team talking to companies. And the biggest thing I remember is how much those companies pushed back on our "rules". They were all eager to talk to the top .1% of candidates, but otherwise just seemed to want an unfiltered firehose of resumes.

So while in theory I like the idea of this meritocratic minimum bar granting special privileges (I liked it enough to join Triplebyte!), in practice we seemed to be fighting an uphill battle with all but a few candidates each month.

On the other hand, I have wasted a lot of time in conversations with recruiters only to be let down at the end by mismatched expectations. I'm interested to see if this new approach can make a meaningful difference in that problem.

i felt the same way, astroturf marketing