21–30 of 199 posts
Maybe there's a way a limited version of the app could be viewable by the alumni, and only the complete viewable by the YC partners?
Investors also operate in a big picture kind of way and see a horizon that is far larger than operators tend to see.
It'll be interesting to see how this adds to the decision-making process for PG. I'd love to see the data (even anonymized) about how the peers review compare to PG and teams reviews.
While I personally don't have a problem with this, I can fathom how some would. What about (1) announcing who is reading and (2) allowing applicants to specify who should NOT read their application. Just a thought, there should probably be some more thought on this kind of privacy/conflict since they will not be investors and I'm assuming you will make this standard procedure.
But, wait a sec... aren't the people who are against potential competitors hearing about their ideas EXACTLY the kind of people who shouldn't apply? I mean, they have to demo their product to the rest of the group at some point, right? That's part of the package. More disturbing is the idea that they will toss any idea that competes with existing startups. That is unsettling to me for some reason, and I would love to…
Will this, or the extended application deadline, affect Nov. 5th feedback date?
I'm curious about the reasoning for this. Is it purely due to not having the time to read through all of them as thoroughly as you'd like, or to help make sure apps don't fall through the cracks (or none of the above)?
Both; those are the same problem, since the biggest danger of not being able to read them all thoroughly enough is that a good one slips through the cracks.
While I personally don't have a problem with this, I can fathom how some would. What about (1) announcing who is reading and (2) allowing applicants to specify who should NOT read their application. Just a thought, there should probably be some more thought on this kind of privacy/conflict since they will not be investors and I'm assuming you will make this standard procedure.
I'd rather make the system based on trusting people. Also, paranoia about secrecy is one of our selection criteria. E.g. every cycle there are a few applications that say they won't tell us any details about what they're doing without an NDA. We thereupon instantly hit "next." People who think their startup's success is going to follow from their immensely valuable secret idea are disproportionately likely to have ba…
I suspect that investors not being willing to sign NDAs is at least as much attributable to the fact that people who want random people to sign NDAs have too much confidence that their idea alone has value, and thus won't understand that execution is vital, and likely will not be willing to evolve their idea as the market demands. Well, that, and "idea" people are just generally useless and annoying. So, asking for an NDA is a sign that you're a useless non-starter who won't be able to build a company or compete in the market (because your idea has to be public before you can do anything with it; if you're concerned that your only advantage is secrecy, then it seems likely to me that failure is imminent).
While I personally don't have a problem with this, I can fathom how some would. What about (1) announcing who is reading and (2) allowing applicants to specify who should NOT read their application. Just a thought, there should probably be some more thought on this kind of privacy/conflict since they will not be investors and I'm assuming you will make this standard procedure.
I'd rather make the system based on trusting people. Also, paranoia about secrecy is one of our selection criteria. E.g. every cycle there are a few applications that say they won't tell us any details about what they're doing without an NDA. We thereupon instantly hit "next." People who think their startup's success is going to follow from their immensely valuable secret idea are disproportionately likely to have ba…
Even smart people have different opinions: what if an applicant thinks someone you chose to read their application is naive (or worse, an idiot)?
Also seems just plain fair that applicants be aware of their audience.
Maybe there's a way a limited version of the app could be viewable by the alumni, and only the complete viewable by the YC partners?
Although I think our company will be massively profitable, our proposal is a long way from glamorous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many application have you received so far, if you don't mind disclosing that ?
We don't publish application numbers anymore, lest it tempt competitors into a numbers race. Plus the number now would be pretty meaningless, because half the applicants apply in the last two days.
If that doesn't scream out to everyone that applying early is important, I don't know what will.