It's the same

Agree with other commentors that the 'weak stone' is difficult to understand for new players

This is not anywhere close to true. Have you built a bootstrapped startup from scratch and negotiated an acquisition? It's far, far harder than practicing a few leetcode Facebook problems and getting a referral.

Agree 100%. I've bootstrapped, I've been acquired, and I've gone through the FB/G/etc. interview processes. Going through those interviews took a few weeks of light prep, whereas bootstrapping to acquisition was a multi-year slog. Just the due diligence portion of the acquisition too many, many, many times the effort of job interviewing.

You don't even need the referral. Unless your CV only has farming experience or something :-)

I concur. My sparse LinkedIn profile shows decades of doing CRUD work for no name companies and I have had recruiters from most of the major tech companies reach out to me. No I couldn’t pass any DS&A tech screen without a lot of preparation.

Even now that I work at one of the Big 5 tech companies, I clearly state that my role is not officially development, I still have recruiters reach out to me from FB for development positions.

There is a big difference between getting recruited and actually getting a job offer.

The discussion was about the need for referrals. But isn’t that what I just said?

No I couldn’t pass any DS&A tech screen without a lot of preparation.

Yeah, but the discussion was about referrals. Referrals are for getting your foot in the door. You don't generally need them for FAANG. You just need a half decent CV.

The hard part is passing the interviews, but referrals don't help with that, from what I know.

An actual referral for an "industry rockstar" would catapult them past the first few rounds of interviewing.

And referrals for top management do the same. Why are we talking about something applicable to maybe 0.00001% of candidates out there?

There was no “confusion”. The only purpose of a referral is to get the interview. If an internal recruiter reached out to you, a referral isn’t necessary.

Either way you still have to go through the same loop.

Yes, I “work for a FAANG” like many others do here.

Yep. Bootstrapping a startup is hard.

FAANG interviews are not even close.

Even just the diligence behind a potential acquisition (stated 'win' condition) is orders of magnitude more stressful than reviewing DFS, lol.

They say "Because of the missteps of this committee, we have asked the NumFOCUS Board of Directors to take over the work of the committee", yet the 7-person board of directors overlaps with the 4-person code of conduct committee.

Board of Directors: https://numfocus.org/community/people CoC Committee: https://numfocus.org/code-of-conduct#persons-responsible

It's just Andy Terrel who's in both, right? That's not a huge amount of overlap. Enough to potentially cause a problem, but 6 members of the board being different (and a whole lot of public backlash) should probably be enough to resolve this.

The 'overlapping person/people' (Andy Terrel in this case) should recuse themselves. Even then, it is no guarantee of impartial results, given that the committee reports to the board.

They seem to have rescued themselfes:

> Because of the missteps of this committee, we have asked the NumFOCUS Board of Directors, minus those involved, to take over the work of the committee as outlined in the appeals process of our enforcement guide.

This was possibly edited later into the article.

C'mon, overlap n = 1

The only two non-staffers (and thus decisionmakers) on the committee were both on the board at some point.

> 7-person board of directors overlaps with the 4-person code of conduct committee

The overlap is one person: Andy Terrel, NumFOCUS President.

That's a pretty important overlap. How many people on a board or in a community are really willing and able to entirely discount the President's views and consider issues independently?

Of the 4 person committee, one is on the board, the other was on the board last year, and the other two are staffers.

The president (who presumably is also the chairman) was the only "non-staffer" on the committee and thus almost certainly had full responsibility already.

The rest of the board should ask for his resignation.

I didn't think this would be useful from the title, but the demo honestly blew me away. I've seen much more expensive applications that only handle read-only cursor playback, but handling real-time tab sharing is amazing.

Appreciate your kind words! Let me know if you have any questions :)

Still don't quite follow your comment. Is "keeping updates in tickets" separate from the comment on deleting messages?

I worked at a place that used Slack pings in lieu of tickets. The history was kept for ~7 years. This is a huge liability IMO. A off comment by the CEO could be misunderstood by an attacker or the public if it was to be leaked.

I’m saying it’s ok for quick cursory discussions but those who retain Slack messages for tribal knowledge tend to have larger organizational issues. This knowledge should be in tickets where it’s expected to write well written responses with the intention of documenting knowledge.