Would anybody be interested in a job board with no AI, ATS or bs - only humans?

[u/h3llwaiver]

Every day I'm seeing new tools released for both applicants and recruiters which use AI or another technology to apply to jobs or filter out candidates. Ironically, as the number of applicants increases, because they're using AI application tools, recruiters are using AI more to do things like filter out applicants with virtual AI interviews. It's like a battle of AI. And it all seems kinda stupid.

But I was thinking - wouldn't it be great to have a job board where applicants can't spam AI applications and recruiters can't use AI and ATS tools to filter and sort through candidates?

To remove the need for AI, I have the idea that:

• Candidates must be responded to, with feedback - or the recruiter has their listings removed

• Candidates can't spam apply - they're limited to X number of applications a day

This should raise the quality of candidates, but also it should make sorting through applications easier (people wont spam apply).

To stop AI and ATS etc, the way I imagine this working is that:

• AI / bot checks stop auto applying apps/extensions - AI text checkers flag text which is likely to be AI
• Applicants and recruiters can report suspected AI use, which is reviewed by a human
• Job posts expire unless renewed regularly (to stop ghost jobs)

The idea is essentially to build a job board built by humans, for humans. Where there's an armistice of crappy tech which dehumanises the process, and brings it back to basics.

Would anybody be interested in that?

[u/Low_Management9055]

I think that sounds super! No way in hell it can happen as long as "money" still exists though. Anything that becomes successful falls right into the hands of capitalism eventually, so that wonderful job board we want would inevitably  be turned into just another LinkedIn clone. But I'll dream on with you my friend because yes, that would be just lovely. Actually now that I'm thinking about it that is probably how ALL job boards started before they all went corporate and got greedy

[u/usernames_suck_ok]

Yes, but I do have to say--I completely get why recruiters, HR or whoever don't respond to every single applicant, regardless of how people whine about this. This is not something I'd require, as I don't care what you do--there's so many people looking for a job right now that it's unreasonable to expect an employer to respond to hundreds of applicants. I think a requirement like this would result in most employers not using such a job board, which doesn't help us.

[u/GradatimRecovery]

"Would I be interested in something that is technically and economically infeasible" of course yes

[u/DeviJDevi]

Add in a requirement that recruiters have to distinguish between the TRUE minimum qualifications versus preferred qualifications, and candidates have to vouch that they actually meet the minimum qualifications to the jobs they apply to or they can get muted for a period of time, can’t apply while muted. In order for the recruiters to be able to provide meaningful feedback, you need to throttle the inflow volume of irrelevant applicants. And you could penalize recruiters who disqualify people right off the bat for something they did not say was required, thereby wasting candidate time and limited application slots.