Jori Koolstra

Aug 31, 2026

Decisions

Active Todos

Patterns

Decisions (1)

Hire Jori Koolstra now - go into the interview intending to sell, then compress the loop to days

Peter had a 10:00 interview with Jori Koolstra for the Linux Kernel Development Engineer role on Aug 30 (a Sunday). Beforehand he asked Nathan Blackham directly whether the slot was an interview or a sell, and said his own plan was already sell: I hope it is sell because that is my plan. I also really hope I like this guy because I LOVE his resume. Immediately after the call he told Nathan Hire him now. That is my take, and in the group DM with Nathan and Brianne Clasen he wrote We should hire Jori. Like... today. In #distinguished-leaders, replying to Bjorn Hovland asking whether anything ever happened with Tim Pepper and saying We need to be better at evangelizing Rocky and We just do not have an active community leader over there, Peter volunteered the same candidate: I also interviewed a kernel engineer candidate that I LOVED today (background in math) who wants to spend a lot of time evangelizing Rocky upstream and building a community. Bjorn replied Get him. Nathan confirmed the next morning that it was a sell, said he would get the roundtable scheduled for today or tomorrow, and added that he might be trying to get him out earlier.

Aug 31

people

Related Patterns (2)

Redesign Conditions Over Policing Symptoms

When a direct report names a vulnerability and proposes surveillance-style verification mechanisms (breathalyzers, daily check-ins, monitoring rituals), Peter accepts the disclosure but pushes back on the surveillance model. Treats the verification proposal as a signal that the underlying environment needs redesign — and offers to change the conditions that produced the vulnerability rather than instrument the symptom. Costs Peter optionality (e.g., committing to broker work-hour expectations directly with the partner/spouse) — the asymmetry signals genuine retention vs transactional.

63 occurrences62% success

Install the Criterion Before the Argument

Applies to a contested question that has not been argued yet - a meeting about to start, a test about to run, an escalation just received, a proposal about to be written. Peter moves first to fix the criterion, the boundary or the posture, before anyone argues the substance. The consistent effect, named explicitly in the 2026-07-29 observation, is that the other party cannot win by being more persuasive on the merits, because the merits are no longer the axis. Distinct from Reclassify to Route in mechanism: that pattern reassigns who owns a question, this one controls WHEN the criterion lands relative to the debate. The two frequently co-occur. Mined from 7 independent observations between 2026-01-20 and 2026-08-31.