What? You can absolutely blame them. Since the beginning they've explicitly marketed themselves as a higher quality, more streamlined alternative to traditional recruiting. If they've set up the incentives within their company such that the pressure to growth hack ruins their brand, that's clearly a founder/management-level problem.

Whatever they say explicitly is a mirage. It's brand marketing 101. You never trust what a company says or portrays itself as, because doing so is just another tool to get customer attention. Instead, only assume that they're a corporation whose sole incentive is increasing profits. Then, extrapolate their actions from that axiom.

Growth hacking does not damage their brand value and in fact might increase it, if they're successful. If more people use them, that's much more useful to their enduring brand value than whatever they'd have lost by spamming.

I see where you’re coming from, but it bums me out to see companies good and bad be lumped into one amalgam. I think you,’re saying you can’t trust TripleByte because they’re a company, because as you say “you can never trust what a company says”. In this case I actually know Ammon both personally and professionally. I met him when he was already a successful founder and I was a nobody years ago. I’ve had many more interactions with him since then, and my prior when I see something like this that could be a (pretty common) bug or malice is to strongly suspect… a bug.

And I dunno, and maybe this isn’t a popular opinion (thus why using a throwaway account) but I actually think “companies” are actually pretty cool. A “company” made the laptop I’m typing this on (which is way better than the one I had a few years ago, and cheaper). A company got reusable rockets to work, and made the first electric car that many people actually like. I don’t think any of this would be possible without, you know, companies. So I’m definitely, like you, going to take what they say with a grain of salt but I’m not going to blanket say “you can never trust” just because they’re a company.

When I interviewed as a newgrad using triplebyte I got a candid response from them as to why they couldn't place me within a week. They told me that I did well in the interview but unfortunately I didn't have the required experience that the companies needed. I'm pretty appreciative that they were candid in their response.

Well, it's painful for me to read that. Is there any chance I could get you on the phone to talk about what we're doing and how to make it not scummy? (That offer goes out to anyone reading this). Email me at [email protected], and I'll find a time to talk. Our mission (helping people get jobs based on the job skills they have, not what their resume says) is something that I think is really important.

I once spent some time to take your quiz to be an interviewer. I guess I didn’t pass, so I emailed to ask what my score was. You refused to give it to me, even after I asked a couple times. Would have been helpful to me for my learning. That was my first and last experience with triplebyte. Nothing extraordinary here.

I'm just gonna edit this, I'm sorry, I didn't need to be so harsh. It's too late to delete it. Oh well. I don't really disagree with what I said, but I lashed out unnecessarily.

Could you clarify your main point? Are you saying Triplebyte promised to change the interview game, but in reality, interviewing with them is the same as going through a regular interview process?

It seems quite different though: you interview once with them, and then go directly to off-sites at multiple companies. Even if the interview is the same, the process is still quite different as you no longer have to send out numerous resumes and go through HR screening and first-round interviews.

Or maybe I misunderstood your point?

In my experience, it was basically the same as talking to a non-technical recruiter that doesn't know any of the qualifications they're looking for. When I tried them out, the "interview" was some guy persistently asking me questions about things wholly unrelated to my resume, skillset, and industry, even after they were told. The experience was pretty off-putting, especially with the later opt-out disaster.

This is borderline mean and not really constructive. He clearly cares enough to respond to people in this thread, being rude like this is uncalled for.

Companies have to stay marketing stuff like this because it converts at least a portion of their users. If they were honest, they would lose most of their potential users. Look at my other comment about company marketing being a mirage.

Claims with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence.

Just look at the rest of the thread for claims, whether they have evidence is something you'll have to ask them. Simply because they are evidence less does not dismiss their claims, due to the number of such claims. In other words, if a lot of people are saying something, you should probably look into it.

I have not found them to be scummy, and have been on both sides (candidate vs my company sourcing through them).

What do you mean? Like Hacker News or YC itself? If the latter, where are you encountering YC doing scummy stuff like TripleByte? And wrist slapping for what?

Why would YC tell TB to stop increasing growth and revenue? They're a VC, that's what they want, of course they'd be endorsing it. It doesn't hurt their brand, again because they are interested only in making money, and founders are similarly interested in a VC that pushes their company to make more money. That you as a bystander (not even a customer) don't like it is inconsequential to both YC and their portfolio companies. See my response to another comment in the thread for more context.

Acting rationally does not preclude one from being a shitty company/person/whatever. They’re doing something sketchy, and we’re allowed to be mad at them for it. The fact that it’s better for their bottom line is not exculpatory.

Sure, I never said they weren't shitty, but it's not useful to be mad at them.

“Making money” as a VC has dependencies on a lot of things, including reputation and deal flow.

Depends, YC is doing pretty well protecting their investments