37Signals, StackOverflow, GitHub, ... But hey, they're all full of job postings, right?
I'm not saying our new jobs site is the magic bullet, but it's an area of software development that we think is lacking, and there's a ton of things we'd like to build to help improve it. This is the first step.
The unfortunate thing is that all these add-on job board solutions don't really go any way towards fixing the problem.
With the greatest respect in the world; I don't see this being a lot different (though I would be overjoyed to be proven wrong! :)). Not for any other reason that it is not really GH's focus...
See; it would be really cool to see this integrated with GH proper. With payment mechanisms so you could write a spec, post an ad, get someone sign up, code the work and then collect the payment. That's the sort of job board you should do :)
For the "real world" there is a lot of work to do for programming jobs - most of the offerings work for big corps and mid/large startups. Smaller indie firms like the one I work for struggle to find good local talent and there is just no one catering for us. And that is a huge market (I know at least 10 firms with the same problem within about 5 miles of where I work - in a sleepy market town).
As for this being different, I don't think it is supposed to be. But I guess we will find out once it actually launches.
Community sites implement job boards not because they're the hot new thing, but because they're trivial to implement and wildly profitable.
To the people adding them, there isn't very many reasons not to add them.
If they can place these ads for 30 days on 10 of these little, influential sites, they're already ahead.
Turning GitHub into rentacoder.com?
I don't see what would be cool in that.
> It would also create a special Github community, where people could trade out work.
Moving the reward from being social in nature (the appreciation of your peers, either those who use/contribute to your project or those whose projects you contribute to) to being an exchange of good, cheapening the whole community.
If anything, we have more of an incentive to keep quality jobs. We don't need to sell job listings to keep the doors open — so we can focus on making the best job board possible.
What situation do you see arising where they worsen the site that they love and that has been making them good money just to "cater to" people who want to post jobs?
Google succeeded largely because they were unusually scrupulous about protecting the quality of their search results, and didn't make compromises that some advertisers wanted at the time.
For text, some of this stuff seems Apple/jobs-esque:
"When you post a job on GitHub Jobs, you're sending a message: you want developers who care about their craft."
I'm sure Jobs or Ive has said something like that in one of their videos.
"Starting next Tuesday, everyone will be able to search and browse jobs."
Sure, this is a standard type of sentence, but the composition is distinctly Apple- "when, who, what" - where the who is 'everyone' - no barrier to entry, straightforward, clear.
"Of course, .... if you don't find them useful. But we think you will."
that's again very Appleish. Confident of the opinion but not overly arrogant, suggestive of the outcome.
I'm not sure i can prove this with empirical evidence, but I definitely feel it.
You could also say that a lot of Acer's marketing has a Dell-like tone. But that doesn't mean Acer is taking cues from Dell.
One week is the added to the schedule to maintain the practice of releasing on Tuesdays. Tuesdays are the designated release day because they are good days for news coverage and the established day we synchronize our content with the mirrors that carry our releases.