I'm a huge fan of AngelList Jobs [0], and made extensive use of it during my last job search, for one very important reason: they require all job listings to disclose salary/equity ranges up front.
Some of the listings there have ranges that are more useful/realistic than others, but I find having at least some indication of potential compensation for a position is infinitely better than not having any idea at all, and avoids so much potentially wasted time on both sides of the job search due to unrealistic expectations around compensation. This is especially important for startup jobs, which can vary wildly in compensation from one company to the next.
Their search and filtering tools are top notch too, as you can break down listings by just about any criteria you might think of, such as industry, tech stack, ___location, size/funding, role, and of course, compensation, for which they even have a dedicated tool [1].
Of course, money isn't everything, and if you're even considering working for a startup like I was, it's probably not your number 1 priority, but nevertheless it's still an important consideration that can pose as a potential deal-breaker for many candidates, especially when looking for jobs in big tech hubs that have higher than average cost of living.
Candidate matching services like TripleByte [2], Hired [3], underdog.io [4] and AngelList's recently introduced A-List [5] can also work well for the right candidates, though I've personally had mixed results with TripleByte and Hired, and haven't yet tried underdog.io or A-List, so YMMV.
The tools I listed are are mostly only useful if you're interested in working for a startup, and not so much if you're looking specifically to work for larger, established companies. But since this is HN, I suspect a non-negligible percentage of people who come across this thread will fall into the former group, so I hope some may find this post useful.
If you are looking for a small (or smallish) company, Angel List is a great place to look. I found the listings to be high quality and the showing interest system works well.
(Full disclosure: I work for Triplebyte) If you want to share publicly or privately, I'm curious to hear about your mixed results. FWIW, our quiz & interview process may have changed dramatically -- not sure when you last tried it. Also, we're now also connected with larger, established companies like FB and AAPL (in addition to startups), but this might be a new development on our end since you last tried it out.
I last tried Triplebyte in 2015, so indeed, a lot must have changed since then, which is why I didn't want to get into any specific details about my experience at the time, as it's probably no longer representative.
For what it's worth, my issue with the process I went through was the significant workload required for the take-home project I chose.
Some background: I semi-specialize in frontend work because I enjoy building great products and user experiences.
Out of the 4 take home projects you offered at the time, only 1 had anything remotely product-oriented: a _multiplayer_ snake game. The take-home projects were estimated to take at most 3 hours, which seemed about right for the other 3 project options, but definitely not for this one, which involved non-trivial frontend work and realtime networking in the backend, which seemed like more of a whole-weekend kind of deal at the very least. Nevertheless I chose this project because the other projects simply didn't interest me at all, and probably wouldn't have given me any opportunity to showcase any product chops because they didn't involve any non-trivial frontend work.
I was also interviewing outside of Triplebyte at the time, so I didn't have a whole weekend to burn on this project. In the end, I worked on it for the estimated 3 hours and had a decently working & polished frontend but couldn't finish the backend component, so that's what I went to the interview with and was rejected for not being able to finish.
In the end I think this was an issue of project selection/scope. I don't think 3 hours was a very honest estimate for the time commitment required for the project I chose, and any project that takes more than 3 hours feels like too much more time commitment than most would be willing to accept.
My personal recommendation for take-home project selection would be to offer the same project choices you'd offer candidates who take the real-time interview path, but simply expect more polish, better code quality, architecture and testing.
Though take that recommendation with a grain of salt, because you guys have probably put way more thought into this than I have. Nevertheless I'd love to hear how your project selection process has evolved since then.
The problem I've had as an employer on Angellist is that the posting has a clear 4+ years experience requirement and I'm inundated with fresh coding boot camp grads. It's gotten to the point that I don't even check it anymore as I am yet to receive a quality candidate after hundreds of "interesteds".
Some of the listings there have ranges that are more useful/realistic than others, but I find having at least some indication of potential compensation for a position is infinitely better than not having any idea at all, and avoids so much potentially wasted time on both sides of the job search due to unrealistic expectations around compensation. This is especially important for startup jobs, which can vary wildly in compensation from one company to the next.
Their search and filtering tools are top notch too, as you can break down listings by just about any criteria you might think of, such as industry, tech stack, ___location, size/funding, role, and of course, compensation, for which they even have a dedicated tool [1].
Of course, money isn't everything, and if you're even considering working for a startup like I was, it's probably not your number 1 priority, but nevertheless it's still an important consideration that can pose as a potential deal-breaker for many candidates, especially when looking for jobs in big tech hubs that have higher than average cost of living.
Candidate matching services like TripleByte [2], Hired [3], underdog.io [4] and AngelList's recently introduced A-List [5] can also work well for the right candidates, though I've personally had mixed results with TripleByte and Hired, and haven't yet tried underdog.io or A-List, so YMMV.
The tools I listed are are mostly only useful if you're interested in working for a startup, and not so much if you're looking specifically to work for larger, established companies. But since this is HN, I suspect a non-negligible percentage of people who come across this thread will fall into the former group, so I hope some may find this post useful.
[0] https://angel.co/jobs
[1] https://angel.co/salaries
[2] https://triplebyte.com/
[3] https://hired.com/
[4] https://underdog.io/
[5] https://alist.co/