u/Weird_Ride213 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
Facts are determined by actions, not just individual perspectives. What we say is inherently subjective, including my own views. That's why people judge based on the sum of one's actions. I've observed, along with many others, a clear dissonance between your role as a supposed "
u/michaelnovati replied · ★ FEATURED
FACT: I stated this for the public record: I asked the team and we do not and have not as far as they are aware, bid on any Google search keywords containing the word "bootcamp", other than "formation bootcamp" (as we bid on many phrases containing formation as it's a Beyonce song and common term)
I don't know all of the job offer details people are getting no, but if it was shared to the public intentionally I would see no problem using it in theory. But no, I don't know all of the job offer details.
I key part of this analysis is that CIRR 2022 data is out, so if I run a less perfect analysis on 2022 data and compare to CIRR, I can do the same analysis on 2023 data and adjust the output based on that + other factors (like that 2023 cohorts were on average smaller according to the public record, APPROX: 30ish H1 2023 and high 20s in H2 2023.)
I'm allowed to pay attention to details, observe, and aggregate...
But that said, Codesmith does share a lot of stuff in general that I don't really know why. A couple of staff have complained to me about concerning data governance, password sharing, codebase sharing, etc... and you have to ask them, but in my opinion, those attitudes show a lack of care for sensitive information, e.g. the CEO using his personal email address for work stuff.