Mfaang: Dating for FAANG Employees(mfaang.com) |
Mfaang: Dating for FAANG Employees(mfaang.com) |
The "clever" code snippet is just silly. Would you use a tax form to lure accountants into your app? Maybe 1% in faang are obsessed with programming. The rest are there for the money.
The problem with dating in faang is the paranoidal anti-sex policy. Basically, just about any move to approach a female may and will be interpreted as harassment, so the game isn't worth the risk. The app needs to work around this policy, at the very least. The other problem is the overall unhealthy atmosphere around personal views that have nothing to do with work. If someone discovers your dating profile and finds there that you carelessly left a remark that you say prefer white women, you'll be fired. This is a disease of the today's tech corps and the app needs to provide anonymity and plausible deniability.
Edit. The exclusivity (or elitism, as another comment says) is a good idea, actually. Letting only certain audience in adds value to the club.
I hate the concept. It feeds into the phony elitism that these companies use to sell themselves. It suggests classism, like an invitation to join a caste system based on employer.
The website is garbage. We are ~15 years past the release of the iPhone one. HTML is mobile-friendly by default. Make a mobile-friendly site especially if you are targeting people who work on the web.
And finally, I hate the cringeworthy copy that uses pseudo-code and unironically says "happily ever after". Tech people are not robots and enjoy reading things in human language.
I will offer this hypothetical: what if I had written, "The concept is exclusive in a way that should offend the human race and feels like the proposal of an American caste system"?
I'm not asking you to respond and debate me. I'm just trying to point out that this is an outrageous idea and saying so with additional words (or a third-person perspective) is not any less fulmination than what I wrote.
At some point, I believe an unemotional response to something deeply anti-human and classist is at best disingenuous and at worst a normalization of ideas like this.
You certainly don't have to be unemotional! but internet rants where people just try to destroy each other (or their work) have a distinctive quality where the emotion is out of sync with the underlying topic, as if one is venting in relation to something else that remains unsaid—for example, the personal experience that the emotion is related to. What makes emotion meaningful to others is when we share personal context of the emotion—then we're sharing something of ourselves. But if you only express the force of the emotion and hide the personal context, this has a disconnecting quality. It also easily starts to resemble aggression.
There are several reasons why this is bad and damages the container here. The most important is that readers can feel this out-of-syncness and excess force, even if the commenter isn't aware of it. Readers who (for whatever reason) identify with the opposite side of the question will feel it as a provocation, and take it as a license to vent their own excess force as well. Actually, since we all overestimate what others do and underestimate what we ourselves do (by at least 10x), they will likely respond even worse. This is how we get destructive flamewars.