Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I often wonder if LI is trying to do too many things at once. At this point it hard not to come to the conclusion that it promotes certain types of behaviors. The problem is that if left laissez-faire, the feed will not attract folks who abhor work influencers. So, perhaps they need to ask who they are really targeting?

For generic work-banter, an app like Blind seems to cut it better. Given the anonymity, it is able to (anecdotally) elicit truer depictions of one's workplace, and this helps folks get real value through what are in essence (unaggregated) reviews of companies and job roles.

By using real profiles and establishing a set up of "professionalism", LI absolutely cuts/reduces the possibility of deriving real value for the layman (read non work influencer and non CXO). Apart from connecting with old colleagues and looking for a new job, why should the layman even bother logging into the platform on a fairly regular basis?

Having said that, LI is great for some things even for the layman. It has been great for looking for new jobs as the article states. But it seems to have a crisis of identity, and it needs to figure out their core audience or differentiate product offerings before it deteriorates into a job board for the laymen like me, in which case it will be possible for a new and trendy job board to come along and replace it.



Blind would be great if it didn't attract and retain the most toxic and reactive folks (in my brief experience). That attribute makes it an undesirable place to be for someone who's well adjusted at their job, which I would say undercuts your assertion that it provides a more accurate view of the workplace. A counterbalance to the polished view you'd get through LinkedIn? Sure. But it's where people go to talk shit.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: