Do you think the 9-9-6 work culture is right?

You are not weird at all. I largely agree with your instinct.

This kind of schedule can make sense for a founding team that has full ownership, full context, and full upside. Expecting the same from employees is a different story. Even with equity on paper, most employees are trading a huge chunk of their personal life for something that may never materialize. The risk and the reward are simply not symmetrical.

There is also a myth that constant pressure produces exceptional work. Short bursts of intensity can work, but sustained 12 hour days usually reduce quality, especially for creative or strategic work. Fresh, calm minds solve problems differently. You cannot brute-force clarity, insight, or good judgment by extending office hours.

Availability does not equal productivity. Being present for 12 hours often just stretches the same amount of real output across more time, while quietly burning people out. Hustle culture looks impressive from the outside, but it rarely compounds in a healthy way.

Ironically, this is something we think about a lot while building @Curatora . The goal is to help people do better work with clearer signal, not more hours. Focused effort beats prolonged pressure almost every time.

Not weird at all. I've been on both sides of this, and it completely changed my perspective.

The corporate side: I worked as a data scientist at Elevance Health. Standard 9-5, clear boundaries, good work-life balance. Honestly? Some days I was checked out by 2 PM. Other days I'd hit flow state and resent having to stop. The structure felt arbitrary - optimized for attendance, not output.

The founder side: Now as CEO of GenStellar, I regularly work 12-14 hour days. But here's the thing - it doesn't feel like "work" the same way. I'm building something I own. The equity isn't a bonus, it's the whole point. When I'm solving a problem at 11 PM, I'm not doing it because someone's watching - I'm doing it because it's my problem to solve.

The disconnect I see in that job posting:

They want founder-level commitment without founder-level ownership. That 250k-1M range (heavy on equity) tells you they know this - they're trying to manufacture ownership feeling through comp. But equity in someone else's vision hits different than equity in your own.

The 9-9-6 model assumes dedication is a time commitment. It's not. I've had 3-hour sessions that moved Genstellar forward more than entire weeks at my corporate job. And I've had 12-hour days where I spun in circles because I was fried but felt obligated to "put in the hours."

What actually works (from my experience):

• At Elevance: I was most productive when I had autonomy over my schedule and clear outcome metrics. The best managers cared about what I delivered, not when I was at my desk.

• At GenStellar: I work insane hours sometimes, but they're self-directed. I take Tuesday afternoon off if I need to. I code at 2 AM if that's when inspiration hits. The flexibility within intensity is what makes it sustainable.

My take on that job:

If you're 20-something with no commitments and genuinely excited about their mission? Maybe it's worth a year to see if you're founder material. Treat it like a paid accelerator where you learn to operate at high intensity.

But requiring physical presence 9-9-6? That's performative hustle culture. Real builders know that focus matters more than face time. If they trusted their team, they'd measure output, not hours.

The fact they scheduled you on Saturday night isn't impressive - it's a red flag that they've confused "always working" with "working effectively."

You dodged a bullet. Or an expensive learning experience, depending on how charitable you're feeling. 😄

Sustainable output > performative exhaustion. Great teams ship on energy, not hours.