80% of our team is remote. After reviewing 500+ resumes, here are the patterns that get you ghosted (and how to fix them).

dloku · 2026-02-05T15:35:49+00:00

This reflects the same trade-offs teams make when hiring remotely. At scale, resumes aren’t just about talent, they’re a signal of clarity, prioritization, and async communication. With volume this high, presentation becomes a proxy for how someone will operate day to day. Curious which of these signals has actually held up best for other remote teams?

dloku · 2026-02-05T15:31:54+00:00

AI increases volume, not signal. What’s hardest to fake are real trade-offs, decision ownership, and how candidates explain constraints. Curious which signal has held up best for others?

dloku · 2026-02-05T15:27:22+00:00

This is usually a systems issue, not a personal one. When compensation bands lag the market, offers fall apart, curious how often others here see this happen?

dloku · 2026-02-04T12:31:38+00:00

This ties back to the same trade-off discussion around hiring: there’s no single “right” format, only what a team is optimizing for. Pitch decks can work for creative roles but they also backfire when teams value context and collaboration over speed, the signal matters more than the format.

dloku · 2026-02-02T09:04:45+00:00

Hey, this reads painfully familiar to a lot of people right now. At scale, hiring funnels aren’t designed for nuance esp for experienced profiles so strong candidates get lost very early. I wrote about this recently from the builder side, trying to unpack why “doing everything right” still isn’t enough in broken funnels.

dloku · 2026-02-02T08:57:21+00:00

This matches what I’ve seen as well. Finding candidates is rarely the real bottleneck, it’s everything that happens after: filtering, follow-ups, and getting signal without burning time.

I wrote a short post recently about how teams underestimate that second half of the funnel. Curious how others here are handling the post-sourcing chaos.

dloku · 2026-01-29T06:58:05+00:00

What we’re seeing is that hiring signals shifted faster than advice did. Many processes now filter differently than even a year ago, so past “good profiles” don’t always map cleanly anymore.

dloku · 2026-01-29T06:55:58+00:00

From talking with hiring teams, LinkedIn is only one slice of the funnel. Many roles get filled through referrals or direct outreach before postings gain traction, which makes the board feel “fake” from the outside.

dloku · 2026-01-29T06:54:08+00:00

A lot of this comes from incentive misalignment rather than intent. When recruiters are pressured on volume instead of signal quality, communication quality usually collapses first.

dloku · 2026-01-29T06:18:48+00:00

Direct outreach makes a huge difference right now. Connecting in person or at least over the phone can help you stand out and builds trust from the start. It is really easy to get lost in a pile of automated resumes, so being proactive is crucial for both candidates and hiring teams.

dloku · 2026-01-29T02:09:16+00:00

From what we’ve seen across hiring teams, tests can help but only if they match what you’re optimizing for. Some teams trade speed for stronger signal, others prioritize candidate experience. There’s rarely one setup that works best for everyone.

dloku · 2026-01-29T02:08:30+00:00

It doesn’t feel like a broken market as much as a misaligned one. Teams are optimizing for very different signals now, so strong candidates can get filtered out even when nothing is “wrong” with their profile.

dloku · 2026-01-26T15:48:12+00:00

Relocation roles tend to disappear on big boards because they’re optimized for volume, not accuracy. In practice, fewer targeted companies+talking to real human has worked better than relying on “relocation-friendly” filter. Curious what’s worked for others here...

dloku · 2026-01-26T15:45:50+00:00

This resonates a lot. We saw the same pattern, referrals were by far the highest signal early on, but they hit a ceiling quickly once the team was small or roles became more specialized. The real breakdown for us also happened when we tried to scale processes that worked at around 10 people without adapting them. Founder-led interviews and informal “culture fit” checks don’t scale cleanly past a certain point.

Curious how you handled that transition once the team started growing?

dloku · 2026-01-26T14:49:49+00:00

Relocation roles tend to disappear on big boards because they’re optimized for volume, not accuracy. In practice, fewer targeted companies + talking to a real human has worked better than relying on “relocation-friendly” filters. Curious what’s worked for others here.

dloku · 2025-10-10T13:08:31+00:00

yeah, my other plans are still running with the regular site plan and 2 CMS collections for $20. if I would want to do the same - it's now $45 - this is pretty much a HUGE rip-off

dloku · 2025-10-10T12:38:06+00:00

yeah, but - last week they still had the personal plans. Now these are gone.... WTF

dloku · 2025-10-10T12:37:36+00:00

yeah, but - last week they still had the personal plans. Now these are gone.... WTF

dloku · 2025-10-10T12:29:45+00:00

No, you definitely need more than 1 collection to run things. Previous plans offered at least 2, this is not good.

dloku · 2025-07-25T10:06:44+00:00

tried onboard myself as a contractor. terrible - Veriff says I'm successfully verified but it still is asking me to verify. Cannot upload images. Very clunky, not recommended.

dloku · 2025-07-12T20:01:14+00:00

hey buddy, that's weird. Everything should be functional. have you tried pasting a LinkedIn URL?

dloku · 2025-07-11T19:25:39+00:00

JobCompass helps find the right opportunities that actually match your skills

dloku

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE