Evalgist @evalgist

Build note: why every match in Evalgist Shortlist comes with a quote. A score alone gives you little to check. A quote shows you the line in the resume, so you know in seconds if the match holds up. If it doesn't, you overrule it. Would you trust a score you can't check?

Criterion: Open-source research code Evalgist Shortlist: Evidence found Quote: "Maintainer of an open-source library for sparse attention." Every match comes with the line from the resume behind it. You read it. You decide. Try 15 resumes free: evalgist.ai/shortlist?utm_…

@maxpostingx A swap that helps: instead of "2 years of experience", list the 2 or 3 things the person must be able to do in month one. Then every applicant gets checked against the same list, whatever dates are on their CV.

@AniBadam The risky part is that both sides now save a week and nobody learns why anyone got rejected. If a screen can point to the line in the CV behind each no, at least the recruiter can catch its mistakes.

@HRTechConf One question worth asking at every screening booth this week: when the tool ranks a candidate, can it show the line in the CV behind the score? If all it shows is a number, a recruiter can't check it.

@IEthics Judgment is hard to read off a CV, so it often ends up decided by gut feel. A fairer way: agree up front what good judgment looks like for the role, and ask every candidate about a real call they made.

@MarcusSpillane Agree. What helps: decide what a good answer looks like before the first interview, then ask about a real example from their own CV and follow up twice. The first answer can be scripted. The follow-ups rarely are.

@andyhq Good list. One addition to step 2: have that person write one line on why they agreed with the tool's ranking or overruled it. A signature looks the same whether they read the file or not.

Write your criteria before you open the first resume. Write them after, and the first strong applicant becomes the standard. Everyone after is judged against that person, not the job. Before the pile: 1. Must-haves 2. Nice-to-haves 3. Deal-breakers What's your top must-have?

@aakashgupta 2,300 applications with almost no replies usually means filters nobody looks at, not 2,300 people deciding he wasn't good enough. Every screening step should be able to say why it said no.

@hacking_hr A simple check: hold referred and external applicants to the same written must-haves, and note the line in each CV that meets each one. If a referral only gets through because someone vouched, you have learned something about the process, not the candidate.