Pet peeve: please allow filtering by location and/or nationality requirements. So many remote jobs have them, but half the time you only find out when you apply that it's for, e.g. US citizens only, or GMT-5 to -8 etc.
Seconded, especially as most jobs clearly state in their requirements which time zones or jurisdictions they accept. If you're hand-picking them, it should be fine to add or scrape that data from the posting itself.
Agree, but this is not a pet peeve. This is quite a fundamental feature to avoid 99% of jobs being irrelevant. This is the first think I looked to do when i got on the page, and I lasted 1 second.
This is the exact reason I've created Remote Leaf[1]. Remote Leaf helps job seekers save time by scouring hundreds of remote job boards and send them the ones that are fit based on the skills and location.
What I am trying to imply is that these are jobs that are authenticated by us and we are striving to list the highest number of jobs posted on daily basis. These jobs are ones verified by a team (group of friends) and shared which are then put in database for users.
I can understand that in general we would assume the increase in quantity may impact the quality negatively but I think we should not generalize this. Highest in this case is in relative terms. We are striving to verify and put higher number of active jobs on daily basis than other similar tools available plus we are trying to ensure the quality is not reduced for the listings that we make available.
Thanks for your comments and pointing that out. There is no scraping done. We are not claiming all jobs to be permanent. The only thing is that all jobs are remote. Will include a filter for this reasons.
All the companies who offer remote jobs are handpicked and their jobs are checked to ensure that they are for remote work before they are inserted in database.
I offer this perspective as someone who is only willing to work remotely because I have significant sensory sensitivities, because I suspect there are many other people like me: The colors in your logo clash so badly/scream so loudly they're physically painful for me to look at, even for a second. It's the first time I can remember ever yanking my phone away from my eyes because of how jarring a logo was.
There's a good chance this is not an issue for people who just have a preference for working remotely, and so might not be worth considering if they're your target market. But for those of us who might come across your site because we depend on remote work for gainful employment, it's so bad as to be exceptional.
That's an interesting ailment. Have you tried Dark Reader? It has modes where it can desaturate everything on the web page. If you're on Windows, you can apply filters to your display output. f.lux has those. I used to use grayscale mode. Sometimes you have to turn colors off to realise just how distracting they can be.
i think it's more than that. google logo only has four colors. though you probably don't want to copy the google colors exactly. i'd research some sensible color schemes. there are design tutorials about that.
Thanks for your feedback. I am sorry if the logo hurt your eyes physically. Will try to see how the logo can be adjusted to make it appear less painful. I guess the colors are brighter which may have made it feel that way.
Thanks for your comments. Those are really valid and good points. We will consider those in further development. Can you please also provide your recommendations on how can we assist in solving that issue.
Thanks for taking time to check and comment. It will be nice if you can provide suggestions that can help in making the platform which you think will make it reach and/or go beyond your level of expectations.
When I search for perl it returns entries for HyperloopTT which doesn't have any openings for perl. I assume you are just sub-string matching against all text. If I add a blank before and after perl it doesn't match any text. Wrapping blanks around perl would also preclude matching "^perl" or "perl\.".
Do you have any plans to allow matching only words?
The new version of the website has been launched. The new version has improved search capabilities. Please kindly check it and let me know if it works better.
Thanks for checking the site. The behavior you mentioned about the search bar is not the expected one. Can you please tell me the browser you are using?
As for the main issue you mentioned, the search bar mentions search remote jobs and the title of the site is clear about it which we believe is good enough. As for the categories we are working on the filters for them.
65 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 142 ms ] thread[1] - https://twitter.com/abinaya_rl
I’m a little bit skeptical...
While it’s technically a 1 time contract job, it’s not a job
How can you work on this and handle "verified handpicked" content without getting some money in any way?
The author of this job listing must be from the United States.
There's a good chance this is not an issue for people who just have a preference for working remotely, and so might not be worth considering if they're your target market. But for those of us who might come across your site because we depend on remote work for gainful employment, it's so bad as to be exceptional.
1) the signal to noise ratio both for the employer and for the job seeker
2) the broken and high-cost interview process
3) the uncertainty of how the employee will turn out even if they pass the interview and the uncertainty of how the job will turn out for the employee
Do you have any plans to allow matching only words?
The main issue I have is that I get to the landing page and I don’t know what to do. What do I search for?
A list with filters would at least give me an idea of what categories I have to choose from, or what fields are available to look at.
As for the main issue you mentioned, the search bar mentions search remote jobs and the title of the site is clear about it which we believe is good enough. As for the categories we are working on the filters for them.