A tech CEO recently became the center of ridicule online after sharing a baffling job listing on LinkedIn. His post, which appeared to seek ultra-dedicated creatives for his AI-based advertising company, was quickly reposted to the infamous subreddit “Linked Lunatics,” where it was relentlessly mocked for its unrealistic expectations, questionable tone, and elitist attitude.
The Job That Demanded Too Much
The post in question laid out a call for “top 1% Founding Creatives” to help improve the company’s AI-powered advertisement creation tool. However, the expectations set forth raised eyebrows across the internet. The job, described as highly demanding and all-encompassing, required candidates willing to commit to a seven-day workweek.
Though the CEO clarified it wouldn’t always mean 100-hour weeks, applicants were expected to be prepared for such grueling schedules when necessary. The role combined strategy, content creation, editing, and anything else needed—signaling a do-it-all attitude that many perceived as exploitative.
Unusual Candidate Preferences
The CEO didn’t just seek experience—he asked for personality traits and life backgrounds that bordered on offensive. The ideal applicant, according to the listing, should have accumulated over 10,000 hours of experience curating or creating content. While prior advertising experience was optional, viral instinct and refined taste were deemed essential. Surprisingly, the listing encouraged those with personal hardships to apply—especially individuals who didn’t come from wealth or carried emotional scars, even hinting that a neurodivergent background was a plus. Many took offense at the implication that trauma or mental health differences somehow made a candidate more suitable—or more pliable.
Defining the 'Ideal' Background
The CEO categorized potential hires into five types: those with viral marketing instincts from dropshipping backgrounds, creative freelancers with extensive portfolios, online creators with large followings built on merit, versatile individuals managing multiple creative projects simultaneously, and former startup founders who remained ambitious. All candidates needed to be open to hands-on editing and ready to endure high-output weeks without hesitation.
Despite the exhaustive requirements, the compensation ranged from $100,000 to $250,000 annually, including equity. While the base salary was advertised as competitive, many calculated the hourly wage based on the workload and found it to be disappointingly low, hovering between $19 and $48 per hour—far below expectations for a role that demanded constant availability and high-level creative output.
Social Media Users Hit Back
Once the post reached Reddit, it attracted widespread criticism. Many users expressed disbelief over the outrageous demands. One sarcastically commented that they wouldn’t even recommend the job to their worst enemy. Others condemned the reference to neurodivergence, accusing the CEO of seeking vulnerable individuals who could be exploited under the guise of passion and grit. Another user slammed the math behind the compensation, calling out how little the hourly rate worked out to, considering the near-constant labor expected.
A Warning to Overzealous Founders
The episode served as a glaring example of how tone-deaf recruitment posts can alienate talented individuals and damage a brand’s reputation. Rather than attracting creative geniuses, the CEO’s listing ended up as a cautionary tale of what not to post when building a team in the digital age.
The Job That Demanded Too Much
The post in question laid out a call for “top 1% Founding Creatives” to help improve the company’s AI-powered advertisement creation tool. However, the expectations set forth raised eyebrows across the internet. The job, described as highly demanding and all-encompassing, required candidates willing to commit to a seven-day workweek.
Though the CEO clarified it wouldn’t always mean 100-hour weeks, applicants were expected to be prepared for such grueling schedules when necessary. The role combined strategy, content creation, editing, and anything else needed—signaling a do-it-all attitude that many perceived as exploitative.
Unusual Candidate Preferences
The CEO didn’t just seek experience—he asked for personality traits and life backgrounds that bordered on offensive. The ideal applicant, according to the listing, should have accumulated over 10,000 hours of experience curating or creating content. While prior advertising experience was optional, viral instinct and refined taste were deemed essential. Surprisingly, the listing encouraged those with personal hardships to apply—especially individuals who didn’t come from wealth or carried emotional scars, even hinting that a neurodivergent background was a plus. Many took offense at the implication that trauma or mental health differences somehow made a candidate more suitable—or more pliable.
Defining the 'Ideal' Background
The CEO categorized potential hires into five types: those with viral marketing instincts from dropshipping backgrounds, creative freelancers with extensive portfolios, online creators with large followings built on merit, versatile individuals managing multiple creative projects simultaneously, and former startup founders who remained ambitious. All candidates needed to be open to hands-on editing and ready to endure high-output weeks without hesitation.
Despite the exhaustive requirements, the compensation ranged from $100,000 to $250,000 annually, including equity. While the base salary was advertised as competitive, many calculated the hourly wage based on the workload and found it to be disappointingly low, hovering between $19 and $48 per hour—far below expectations for a role that demanded constant availability and high-level creative output.
Social Media Users Hit Back
Once the post reached Reddit, it attracted widespread criticism. Many users expressed disbelief over the outrageous demands. One sarcastically commented that they wouldn’t even recommend the job to their worst enemy. Others condemned the reference to neurodivergence, accusing the CEO of seeking vulnerable individuals who could be exploited under the guise of passion and grit. Another user slammed the math behind the compensation, calling out how little the hourly rate worked out to, considering the near-constant labor expected.
A Warning to Overzealous Founders
The episode served as a glaring example of how tone-deaf recruitment posts can alienate talented individuals and damage a brand’s reputation. Rather than attracting creative geniuses, the CEO’s listing ended up as a cautionary tale of what not to post when building a team in the digital age.
You may also like
IIT Bombay study finds protein abundant in human body worsening diabetes
Danny Dyer makes daughter Dani gasp with x-rated honeymoon confession
Arsenal 'submit offer for Chelsea star' as Mikel Arteta considers blockbuster double swoop
Jamia Millia gets govt nod to set up Department of Library and Information Science
Delhi Speaker Vijender Gupta seeks blessings from Dalai Lama
