GitHired - Find 100x engineers by proof of work, not resume keywords

@raghavb11 Raghav — the "no more fake green charts" line is doing a lot of quiet work in your

pitch and I don't think you're selling it hard enough. That's the actual moat.

Anyone can scrape commit counts; filtering coauthored-vanity commits, force-pushed

green squares, and bot-generated PRs is the part that's genuinely hard to reproduce

without seeing what GitHired sees. If you have a writeup of how you detect that,

pin it — it's the proof that you're not "another GitHub stats wrapper."

Two pieces of feedback as someone watching the demo flow:

1. The SOURCE → ANALYZE → ENGAGE story is clean, but ENGAGE is where most of these

products quietly die. You can rank 10K cracked devs perfectly and still lose because

the outreach message reads like every other recruiter DM. Top 1% engineers get 30+

of those a week and filter them on the first sentence. Worth thinking about whether

you can ship a "show this dev a one-line, project-specific reason this role would

be interesting to them, generated from their actual repos" feature. That's the bit

that turns 10K cold profiles into actual replies.

2. The $10K/hire Done-For-You model is a great way to bootstrap revenue without a

sales cycle, but it puts you in direct competition with technical recruiting

agencies who have decade-long relationships with hiring managers. The Self-Serve

$250/seat is where the venture-scale outcome lives. I'd be watching closely whether

your DFY revenue starts cannibalizing Self-Serve adoption or feeding it.

Now the founder-to-founder bit, since you asked us to tear it apart and you said

"first search is free":

I'm running MentionFox (mentionfox.com) — a solo build, also shipping fast, also

on PH eventually. We do for distribution what you do for hiring: surface real

signal, filter the fake stuff. Concretely: across X, Reddit, HN, Substack, Discord,

news, etc., we catch the moments where a founder posts "we're hiring engineers and

resumes are useless" — exactly the conversations where GitHired belongs in the

reply — and we kill the noise (low-rep accounts, drive-by complaints, off-topic

threads). Same proof-of-work logic you apply to commits, applied to mentions.

The reason I'm bringing this up specifically for you: hiring-tools is one of the

hardest categories to get distribution in because the buyer (founder/CTO) doesn't

hang out in r/recruiting — they hang out in r/startups, /r/ExperiencedDevs, X

threads from a16z partners, and Substack posts about scaling teams. Generic listening

tools (Brandwatch et al) miss those because they're built for brand monitoring, not

buyer-intent signal. Happy to set up a free week of signal scanning on "how to hire

engineers / proof of work / resume screening / 100x engineer" type conversations

across your real distribution channels and send you the leads it surfaces — no

catch, just curious whether the matching quality holds up for a SaaS like yours.

DM @thefoxsaul on X or reply here and I'll set it up.

Either way: pin the fake-commits methodology somewhere prominent. That's the demo

that makes the rest of the pitch land.

— Saul

@thamibenjelloun thank you!

@kane_collier glad to hear that!

@abhinav_anand21 its optional if you want us to get access to it- because not everybody is an open source dev:)

@m_tolga_cangoz there's no way to get only read access in GitHub OAuth apps- its the standard default from GitHub

@imad_elkhafi quality too!