Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think I agree with your main point, but I object to your reasoning. Did you really spend only 20 minutes on your app? I'm skeptical that it's possible to literally spend that little time on it and still get accepted to the program. The app even says, "We look at online demos only for the most promising applications, so don't skimp on the application because you're relying on a good demo." Spread out over a few week…
He didn't literally mean 20 minutes. Even if he did, that's not the point he was trying to make.
Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
21–30 of 30 posts
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think I agree with your main point, but I object to your reasoning. Did you really spend only 20 minutes on your app? I'm skeptical that it's possible to literally spend that little time on it and still get accepted to the program. The app even says, "We look at online demos only for the most promising applications, so don't skimp on the application because you're relying on a good demo." Spread out over a few week…
He didn't literally mean 20 minutes. Even if he did, that's not the point he was trying to make.
I didn't even know about the program until the afternoon on which applications were due--I had seen the Boston one come and go, but would have never considered a move from Austin to Boston...by the time I realized there was one in CA, it was close to too late. I submitted it within hours of the deadline, and had dozens of other things going on at the same time. I looked back over it later (before going for the interview in Boston), and it was pretty bad, except in a few spots where deep knowledge of our field and code overwhelmed the slapdash nature of the thing as a whole.
If it makes you feel better, we just scraped by, on the obvious difficulty of the problems that we had already solved when we arrived for the interview (and even then pg was not on board with what we were doing...I'm pretty certain we owe our acceptance entirely to Trevor and rtm, who have done system administration and recognized the pain that our product takes away, while pg seemingly couldn't figure out why we would even want to address those problems).
But, you're absolutely right: It's not the point I was trying to make.
s/20 minutes/2 fortnights/g and the intent is the same.
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
He didn't literally mean 20 minutes. Even if he did, that's not the point he was trying to make.
Actually, in my case I did literally mean 20 minutes. Apologies to folks who spent significantly longer (and I'm not disparaging you for doing so). It was merely lack of knowledge on my part that led to me filling it out so quickly. I didn't even know about the program until the afternoon on which applications were due--I had seen the Boston one come and go, but would have never considered a move from Austin to Bosto…
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#24There should be a special logo for YCombinator rejects to display. I humbly offer http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1169/1251010963_4787666411_m....
Ha i like that.
"We label ourselves as a rejected company to show perseverance..."
I think it shows more of either: a) taking rejection too personally, or b) mean spirited demonstration that YC made a mistake by not funding you.
Either way, I don't think it's in any way "unethical"... just unwise. If you think YC made a mistake, and you want them to correct it, explain so in your application for the next round. If you've changed your mind, and don't want their support anymore, don't dwell on it and go on with your life.
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
That does make sense, and I think it is natural for a Ycombinator applicant to try and highlight their startups here. I do not mind if you change the URL as well. I think the suggestion to use "YCombinator Applicant" would solve it in the future for anyone else. Cool?
> the suggestion to use "YCombinator Applicant" would solve it It would obviously mean exactly the same thing. Just describe what your startup is, not what it isn't.
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#26There was a rash of startups doing this to get attention a few months ago. After the first couple we started deleting such descriptions. It's an edge case, but probably abuse, especially considering the motive. Which incidentally is probably also a large part of the motive for this post. If you were really just interested in the abstract question, you could have avoided the appearance of an ulterior motive by making…
That will kind of solve itself as most of them go nowhere and nobody ever hears about them again.
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#27Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ha i like that.
Why the obsession with YC? Are you making lists of everyone that's ever turned you down or told you your idea won't fly? If you have a good idea, that'll turn into a long list... "We label ourselves as a rejected company to show perseverance..." I think it shows more of either: a) taking rejection too personally, or b) mean spirited demonstration that YC made a mistake by not funding you. Either way, I don't think it…
I'm really curious what percentage of the submissions that get rejected go on to incorporate and put something out there.
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#29There was a rash of startups doing this to get attention a few months ago. After the first couple we started deleting such descriptions. It's an edge case, but probably abuse, especially considering the motive. Which incidentally is probably also a large part of the motive for this post. If you were really just interested in the abstract question, you could have avoided the appearance of an ulterior motive by making…
Where is the abuse in seeking attention by using a truthful description? I think making a title that catches the attention of news.yc readers is only abuse if it does not truthfully describe the link it points to. If there is some other reason why you don't like "YC reject" in titles (unhealthy us vs them mentality?), why not comment on the submitted article asking the submitter to edit the title? I'm not affiliated…
Re: Labeling A company as YC rejected? Not OK?
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is the abuse in seeking attention by using a truthful description? It is truthful, but it is not a description.
If the site linked to was submitted in a YC application and was not accepted, then "YC reject" is truthfully an attribute of the linked site. It is as descriptive as, say, the color scheme the site uses. You may see it as an uninteresting attribute; others may find it interesting. Voting answers the interesting/uninteresting question. What the editors do is to answer the appropriate/inappropriate question.
I was relying on a less inclusive meaning of the word: to describe as in to relate intrinsic properties of something. Yes, 'intrinsic' itself is a sloppy concept defined mostly by convention, but that's true for most of our language. I'll leave it at that, apologize for my sloppy language, and appeal to common sense.
My point is that the "rejected by YC" tag doesn't add much information, certainly not enough to merit being in the title. Its main effect is attention grabbing. Those priorities are inappropriate enough for me, and I support the banning of this kind of stuff.