19 ms·
VCs, don't compare me to your wife
- MicroBerto 11y agoI suppose that VCs can compare you to whomever and whatever they like when they have money that you are professionally begging for.
- CatDevURandom 11y agoI'm trying to give your comment the benefit of the doubt, but I can't help but read that as "well, beggers can't be choosers so just deal with it". > I suppose that VCs can compare you to whomever and whatever they like Generally true of all people, not just VC. Is it not, therefore, reasonable then to in turn judge said person for that behavior? > when they have money that you are professionally begging for. Which is cool because they are in the position of power? Could you clarify? The author did not take the money. Politely declined and moved on.
- hueving 11y agoExpect VCs to be unfiltered because they are in the position of power.
- MicroBerto 11y agoWhat do you think I'm trying to say? If you don't want to be in a position where someone can hold power over you and judge you, then don't put yourself in a position where someone can hold power over you and judge you. It's that simple.
- true_religion 11y agoAs a profession supplicant, I'd expect the people I beg to be at least professional as well.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- prawn 11y agoShe's saying "If you act like this, I'll walk away; if you want to remain open to all opportunities, maybe don't act like this."
- benjamincburns 11y agoAdmittedly I've never raised capital, but I'd expect that if this is your attitude toward raising money or toward investing, you won't do well. Asking for investment isn't begging for money. It's a sales pitch. Likewise, investing isn't charity, it's a purchase of equity with the expectation of a profitable return. Your comparison belittles the author and offers no real insight into the discussion.
- csomar 11y ago> Admittedly I've never raised capital Which makes your point close to worthless. When you are raising money, you are in one of these two positions: 1. Investors are knocking your doors and giving your offers and you have/can/might pick. 2. You burned through all of your initial cash and now you are 3 months away from music stopping. You have to literally beg for money to save your dream.
- caryhartline 11y agoBut it sounds like she is completely fine with walking away from these VCs. That she will just go to another VC that she likes and that she isn't "begging" at all.
- minimuffins 11y agoYeah, they have the power to make decisions on whatever backwards reactionary criteria they want, since they have all the money (who's arguing that?), but super hot take here: that's actually bad. Actually, that's pretty much the definition of structural sexism (which is bad).
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- carrotsticker 11y agoSuper unpopular opinion incoming. The guy was taken out of context and clearly said he was trying to explain why the number of female founders was less. His thoughts had to do with not many of them applying because they prefer to be mothers. Does not matter if thats true or not, what matters is less apply. Also, the affirmative action think irks me. Statistically 99% of pitches dont get funded. If there is 19 male pitches for every female pitch, does that mean that the female should get funding because its less common? I would feel disgusted as a woman to know I got funded just to have a quota filled and a box checked. When a woman pitches with a great idea, it should be seen as a success, not as a VC giving out charity. This stuff really takes away from the accomplishments of women and I hate it. The fact that you think that more women should have been funded just because they are women lets your bias shine through. Newsflash, Women and minorities can have, and usually do, just as shitty business ideas as CIS white men.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- gemma 11y ago> The guy was taken out of context and clearly said he was trying to explain why the number of female founders was less. His thoughts had to do with not many of them applying because they prefer to be mothers. Out-of-context quote from the VC: > I think mother's [sic] have more important things to do > Be mother's [sic] > But I'm old school That's not a man saying "I think mothers have different priorities," that's a man saying "I have different priorities for mothers."
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- HillRat 11y ago... Except that he's quoted as saying, "I think mothers have more important things to do [than be entrepreneurs]" which, while certainly a position that can be defended (though you won't see me doing so), is inarguably prejudiced against female founders with children: he is explicitly saying that mothers should not be entrepreneurs and implicitly saying that he would disfavor such a founder. He's very openly stating his prejudice against an entire class of people, to a member of that class.
- jdonaldson 11y agoI wouldn't want to invest in or work for someone who was so quick to play the victim card.
- CatDevURandom 11y agoWhere is she playing the victim, exactly?
- speeder 11y agoThe conversation that made her post the rant was obviously she asked the guy why there is less women entrepreneurs, the guy made clear he was uncomfortable with the questions and replied with a reply that is common sense ( ie: most women aren't entrepreneurs, thus there is less women wanting vc money) and she took offense at the reply.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- CatDevURandom 11y agoI agree his comments were taken out of context. I don't see where "the guy made clear he was uncomfortable" but I could guess he probably was. And again, it probably was taken out of context. However, I don't see how his reply, in any shape or form is common sense. And it explicitly not the reason you give. "( ie: most women aren't entrepreneurs, thus there is less women wanting vc money)". He actually says, the reason is women are being mothers. That's why. But he's just old fashioned. And then guesses that most women prioritize that "[my wife] would rather be a mother and be with our kids" with respect to # of female ent. And she took offense to that -- and so do I.
- csomar 11y ago# I'm the wrong person to ask
- romanovcode 11y ago
- blablablame 11y agoI don't know the author, or her life circumstances, but to believe that 'Because in my head, I can’t imagine a scenario where you trust someone with millions of dollars to run a business but think that they don’t know how to deal with childcare.' Is just sexism is idiotic. It isn't the childcare itself, is the pregnancy and the 1st year that is the 'problem'. Women can and are as good entrepreneurs as men, but if for a second you think (exceptions excluded) women, during pregnancy and first months of a newborn can run a business without sacrificing something you must never been around that scenario. And if I was going to put a million dollars in your business and there is even a 5% chance you may end up pregnant, it will indeed be a minus in my book (as an investment though) You either sacrifice the health of your baby with long nights, long working hours, stress, etc, or you sacrifice the company when you take those 2-3 days because morning sickness or tiredness don't allow you to be on your best. Is it unfair? Yes, very, but pregnancy and breastfeeding is something that takes a toll on women and no matter what a partner tries to do to help, he can't really carry the baby in is belly or start producing milk. Think of it this way, if the entrepreneur was a man, it would be akin to asking how he would expect to keep focusing on their sports career (5+ hours practise a day) and running a VC-based startup.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- skrebbel 11y agoGood point, however all of this only holds in the American west coast bizzarro world where the only way to build a successful company is to work 80 hours a week, not sleep, and ruin all your relationships. There are plenty of examples of companies where sane working hours are the norm (irrespective of founder gender) and in those companies, the impact of a single founder/manager being less available/dependable for a while is also smaller. Of course, there's a pretty large class of VCs that will only fund founders who're willing to go 100% kamikaze just for a spot on their power law curve, and your argument holds for them. But I know where I'd want my money from.
- hitekker 11y agoMuch like confessing a dark secret, breaking-up, asking someone out, etc, my policy has never been to initiate or allow any serious, longwinded conversation over mobile/phone text.
- refurb 11y agoEntrepreneurs - and we are a totally different breed of human being than just about anyone else. Anyone else cringe at this part?
- hockeybias 11y agoSi.
- mc32 11y agoIt's hyperbolic, stilted, but not necessarily cringeworthy. It comes from the perspective of someone who believes they have been treated unfairly. It's like when you go on an interview for a job and you say something, the interviewer understands it one way, you try to correct them, but you know their fist take is the one which will linger and you feel it's unfair.
- romanovcode 11y ago>It comes from the perspective of someone who believes they have been treated unfairly. It comes off as someone who is very pretentious.
- minimuffins 11y agoYes.
- dwaltrip 11y agoEntrepreneurs are different in some regards. They have much higher risk tolerance, care less about doing things the "recommended way", etc. This isn't to say they are superior in any way. That is a different statement.
- sarahnadav 11y agoYes, it wasn't a value judgement
- sarahnadav 11y agoI wasn't saying that Entrepreneurs are better. I was trying to make the point that if you are going to segregate people according to "types" then see the person in front of you as a "Entrepreneur" and not a "woman"
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- adn 11y agoSaying something like "look at how pitiful feminism has become" is very obviously baiting and not productive in the slightest.
- marcoperaza 11y agoYou asked this guy why there weren't more female founders, so he gave you his personal opinion backed with his personal experience with his wife. Would you prefer that he lie to you instead?
- icebraining 11y agoShe's also just giving her personal opinion backed by her experience as a founder.
- dwaltrip 11y agoNo, she just happens not to like the way he (and apparently a good number of other VCs) mentally navigates the issue, and chose to write a blog post expressing these thoughts. She doesn't like the idea that mothers can't be founders because they "have better things to do".
- yummyfajitas 11y agoWait a second. Is this author saying that as a woman, she doesn't have any special insight into female users, isn't closer to the female audience, and doesn't bring any special female viewpoints into tech? And in fact, the only similarity between her and another person is if the person is also an entrepreneur? There is no special female perspective, and therefore we don't get diversity of viewpoints or other cognitive benefits just by having more women? That sure seems to contradict the narrative.
- ntakasaki 11y agoHave you read the entire thing? It's about comparing them to VCs wives, presumably housewives, not about a special female perspective on, say a female focused startup, but being compared to a female who wants to be in a traditional role in a patriarchal society. Not sure how any one can miss it as badly as you did.
- yummyfajitas 11y agoI read it. She's ranting about something else - a VC suggesting he has no female-founded companies in his portfolio because very few apply - and somehow this offends her. But along the way, she claims that "the extent to which she is founding a company is the extent to which I have something in common with her", which pretty much contradicts the entire pro-diversity narrative.
- jmagoon 11y agoSeems like the part she's pissed at is "I think mothers have more important things to do...be mothers".
- codingbinary 11y agoWhich is true, because your child should be your #1 priority. Regardless of your gender.
- 11y ago
- pavornyoh 11y agoI respect the writer drawing this conclusion based on a conversation. But can we have the chat from the beginning instead of just a few texts starting from Honestly- I'm the wrong person to ask. I think mothers have more important things to do ... be mothers? I am not taking the VC's side but let's see the entire chat then form an opinion as the said VC isn't here to defend himself.
- adn 11y agoI believe the authors argument is that the VC's (or at least this particular one) use the antiquated idea that "mothers should be mothers" to subconsciously look down on woman founders who pitch, because they should be at home "being mothers" instead. e: this guy said it better https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11105578 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11105578
- icebraining 11y agoDefend himself? He's not even identified! It's just an example of what the author is talking about, it's not a personal attack. Even if you would interpret it differently, it doesn't really matter, because the subject is not that particular conversation.
- drewrv 11y agoThis guy is literally a father. Why does he believe he can be a father AND a VC, yet women are incapable of being a mother AND a founder? Then he uses his wife as an example to extrapolate the desires of half the world population. He's absurd.
- xlm1717 11y ago> When you ask me about having it all, or how am I going to manage my kids, I seriously think that you are insane. Because in my head, I can’t imagine a scenario where you trust someone with millions of dollars to run a business but think that they don’t know how to deal with childcare. Is that not why they ask the question then?? If they don't think someone can handle childcare, then the author is right, they won't trust that person with millions of dollars.
- tkt 11y agoI disagree that that's an appropriate or useful question, but if the VC truly thinks it is (and it's even actually legal), then shouldn't they ask all their potential entrepreneurs this question?
- ryanlol 11y agoHow could it possibly not be an appropriate question? If you go ask someone to give you their money, you have absolutely no right to complain about how they do their due diligence.
- icebraining 11y agoNope, sorry. People do have a right to complain. Doing so may hurt their chances of actually getting such money, but they certainly have that right.
- ryanlol 11y agoThat's fair, in the US the first amendment grants everyone that right. I suppose that could've been better worded as: If you go ask someone to give you their money, you are in no position to complain about how they do their due diligence.
- icebraining 11y agoYou are if you have a good BATNA.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- adn 11y agoI'd like to point out that this is the same person who was baiting with the "look at how pitiful feminism has become" comment from below, and also that "radical" is an equally baiting statement.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- marcoperaza 11y agoSome more quotes: >Getting women to pitch more and better isn’t going to change the dynamic of investors being mainly men who like to invest in people like themselves. We are setting up an entire generation of motivated women to put themselves “out there” only to be shot down. >It is time for the next wave, and it has to be focused on men. We need gender diversity workshops, sensitivity training, sexual harassment workshops for CEOs, VCs and Angels.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- tommynicholas 11y agoThese threads on HN are always extremely rough to read. I wonder what would need to happen for a more productive conversation around this topic to be possible? More participation, more moderation, better understanding, what would it take?
- sarahnadav 11y agoI think that a lot of these conversations are happening at "Women in Tech" events and it would be great if there was a way for men to be more of a part of that
- dominotw 11y ago> it would be great if there was a way for men to be more of a part of that I for one am too scared that I might blurt out something offensive inadvertently and get labeled a 'misogynist' which can pretty damning to one's career and something you cannot defend yourself against. All it takes is one person with an agenda to tarnish your reputation forever. I don't want someone tweeting at my employer with "are you ok with this .." thanks but No thanks. I am going stay far far away from "women in tech" business .
- sarahnadav 11y agoThere has to be a more and better inclusive model. Because we really need to all learn how to get past this
- dominotw 11y ago>There has to be a more and better inclusive model. What are some of your thoughts around how to achieve this.
- sarahnadav 11y agoI am not really happy with "Women in Tech" movement in general, I think that it should be broader and more focused on diversity. So, I would like to see events that are more focused on bringing people together.
- Shorel 11y agoA VC should focus on the profitability of the investment, everything else is potentially noise.
- VLM 11y agoNobody wants to discuss stress tests as part of that focus? Under the assume the best case scenario situation, dude wanted to see how she responds to ridiculous stress. Well, we have an answer here. Hmm. Wonder what happens the next time something stressful happens. Some obscure legal thing or a reviewer makes fun of them or ... The unfortunate part is being a woman she has an obvious stress test point of commenting on her gender. I suppose I'd get stress tested by asking how a non-ivy grad could ever play on a strictly ivy grad playing field. Or they'd make fun of my kids or ancestry or where I live. Ah I know, I suck because I should have been born to richer parents, that one is a classic. Anything to see how I respond to ridiculous stress levels seems like fair game. Its a little further than your average HR drone would go when interviewing your average customer service rep, but, its kind of an important stressful job.
- Shorel 11y agoI think you raise a very valid point. > The unfortunate part is being a woman she has an obvious stress test point of commenting on her gender. We all have stress points. Research has shown men react to stress by isolating themselves, while women react to stress by looking for the company and support of their female friends. Besides the obvious publication of her point of view in search of said support, her behaviour is more consistent with belief of being entitled to the VC money than anything else.
- VLM 11y agoI think if she had disciplined the VC she'd have her money right now. Or at least this wouldn't be in the way. One fundamental responsibility of leadership is disciplining misbehavior. In this case the VC provided a ridiculous over the top sexist commentary somewhere between illegal and merely unethical, and instead of standing up for what is right and/or threatening discipline as best she can, she blogs about a private conversation. Not good at all. Is that how all ethical problems or discipline problems will be handled? VCs may as well pile up their money and burn it to save time. The other side also earns a demerit. Come on, you stress test a female applicant by going for the girl angle, could you possibly be a little less creative? Previous people have probably noticed the whole "girl" thing, her being a female and all that. You could at least try, look into her childhood or education or management style or past employment or almost anything else to stress her would have been more creative. Still if a dud torpedo blows her out of the water, it wasn't really a dud, was it? And an IM conversation isn't as under pressure as face to face, none the less I'd give her some credit for not doing as well as carefully reasoned "monday morning quarterbacking".
- theandrewbailey 11y agoAt first, I was thinking that "your wife" was a stand-in for someone who is not involved with your business, in the context of figuring out who your customers are.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- new_corp_dev 11y ago> Conference and panel organizers who “can’t find” diverse panel members should be fired. Point blank. > We talk to each other. We warn each other. If there aren’t any women pitching you, it’s not a pipeline problem. Secret industry blacklist amongst women, causing them to actively avoid potential opportunities. Blacklist prevents women from applying for VC funding, panels, etc. Fire everyone. Point blank.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- Humjob 11y agoI did a cursory lookup of the author on LinkedIn. It appears that she hasn't done anything really substantive in the startup world and that her primary role is to serve as a 'diversity mentor,' 'journalist', and 'strategy consultant.' She had a startup for two years named BUKIT that was supposedly a distressed debt platform - sounds like it could be a lucrative idea/market, except for the fact that a google search for BUKIT reveals absolutely nothing. Overall, this whole post reads like a frustrated SJW who hasn't been able to accomplish anything real in the tech world, so she takes out her grievances on 'socially backwards venture capitalists.' In my opinion, these types of people are a cancer in tech and should be called out as such. Eric Smith Roberts (one of the founders of the open source movement) wrote a great short essay on this topic: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918
- tzs 11y agoThe 'r' in 'esr' is Raymond, not Roberts. Roberts is a dread pirate, not an open source movement founder.
- natrius 11y agoThis entire comment is an ad hominem argument. This sort of thing hurts the quality of discussion here.
- samstokes 11y agoDownvoted for the ad hominem dismissal of the OP, but also... "Eric Smith Roberts"? Really? If you're going to appeal to authority, at least get the authority's name right.
- Lanari 11y agoIt's the same when an investor ask you do you have a job? are you going to quit it for your project? are you going to stick with your project long enough? Investors want you to have 100% of your time to your project, it's just how it works.
- adn 11y agoThis would make sense if they same VC also asked a male founder if his wife was pregnant, and if he was going to abandon the startup for his family. Except we all know they wouldn't dare ask that question, because it would be extremely rude and potentially illegal (?). But for some reason it's ok with the female founders, again because of the idea that "mothers should be mothers" that this VC expressed in the text message.
- phil21 11y agoWhy do you think this doesn't come up? As a single father of course it came up in every funding/hiring discussion I ever had. And it was perfectly reasonable for them to ask, due to the roles I was being offered. If I got offended by that, I didn't understand the sheer amount of work and effort those positions were going to entail. If I'm hiring a 9-5 support tech, it's irrelevant. If I'm hiring a "kills the company if it's the wrong hire" position, you bet your ass I'm looking at it from every angle. And someone being able to commit 100% to that is very key - doesn't matter if it's kids, sports, hobbies, whatever. If you decide you want work/life balance, a startup founder is not for you. At least one that is funded by VCs.
- icebraining 11y agoAs a single father of course it came up in every funding/hiring discussion I ever had. Did it come up before you were a father?
- Lanari 11y agoIf he is a single father he will get asked questions about his kids I suppose.
- 11y ago
- andraganescu 11y agojesus christ! what are these comments? there is a valid point here. i don't even like how the author writes but the point is this, taken from a response: >> Imagine how many opportunities this firm has walked past because they’re old school. Shouldn’t their LPs be concerned? What do you mean "old school?". I am from the other side of the planet than the US and i am statistically flooded with stories of the problem of under funding women, with discrimination based on sex and with the pregnancy issue as a roadblock to career for women. how can a manager in a VC have an "old school" opinion in 2016? these days you either have one opinion or the other, there is nothing "new school" in realizing that women are less funded because their biologic life is seen as a liability by the males of the species who have all the money. Jesus!! Old school?? Your wife? You are someone who should be smart enough to predict success and you bet other people's money but you know so little about a woman's determination that your best answer is by proxying to your nearest women. This is like me having a billion dollars explaining that i believe rockets are not funded as easily as dating apps because I am old school and i think all physicists are nerdy introverts and they'll never be good at running a business because they rather stay and read science fiction books all day long, and i know that because my physicist cousin who is also a drunk is exactly like that. And quotas? Who is even talking about quotas? Amazing!
- yummyfajitas 11y agoThis is like me having a billion dollars explaining that i believe rockets are not funded as easily as dating apps because I am old school and i think all physicists are nerdy introverts and they'll never be good at running a business... A direct translation of the VC's theory would be that "that's [nerd hypothesis] why I think there are less nerd founders...which translates to less funded companies by nerds". Fewer apply so fewer are accepted.
- sarahnadav 11y agoYES. THIS. THANK YOU.
- dominotw 11y ago> tell you to STFU every single time People who have be told to STFU over last 2 weeks. 1. marc andreessen 2. gloria steinem 3. stephen fry 4. margaret albright 5. richard dawkins 6. Meryl streep If ppl like these who have public speaking experience are getting stfu then what chance do ordinary people have .
- sremani 11y agoThere is a corollary to First amendment (Freedom of Speech), it is Freedom to not listen. I think people should exercise it more than trying to shutting others.
- sarahnadav 11y agoOP here. AMA
- pavornyoh 11y agoHello.. Is it possible to post the entire chat conversation?
- sarahnadav 11y agoI went back and looked through the conversation. The entirety of the discussion only makes him look worse. It starts by me asking if they have invested in any women, him saying No and then I say "Isn't that weird" and then the screenshots start. Then we continue to chat and it turns into an argument.
- smm2000 11y agoYep, please give full context. What was your question?
- sarahnadav 11y agoMy question was if the VC had funded any women led start ups. He said "no"- I said that I thought it was strange and asked him why he thinks women aren't getting funded, and that is where the conversation begins.
- ryanlol 11y agoHave you ever in your life invested significant sums of money into someone else's business? Do you think that you being a mother isn't something that potential investors should take into account while performing risk analysis?
- sarahnadav 11y agoI have invested time and energy but not money. (I don't have that kind of money) IMO, being a mother is a bonus but no, I don't think that they should take it into account. I think that they should look at the idea and ability to execute. I think that all the data shows that women led companies are more successful, so if they do take it into account it would only be to the benefit of the mother.
- csomar 11y agoThis "female founder" lacks diligence. There are many wrong things: 1. The guy on the conversation has an opinion. Everyone is entitled to his opinion. He is clearly not the guy doing the picking/selection. Just a stuff crew. Shaming people for their opinions (it'd have been worse to name him) is just as racist/sexist as you endure. 2. Every one, race, religion... goes through this. You can't prevent selection bias. But you might be able to defeat it with your startup performance. Human are biased, and trying to change their minds will not work. Which will lead us to the third point. 3. Markets will decide. In a capitalist market, the inefficient guy will not stand for long. In the long term, the efficient guy will win. Which is probably why software is eating the world. If women are better (or equal), things will work out in their favour on the long term. (e.g.: a VC that keeps an eye on female-founders because they are under-valued). Conclusion: Don't write offensive and controversial blog posts when you are trying to raise money.
- sarahnadav 11y agoSo, I wrote the article and the thing that is the most interesting to me is that I am getting an incredible amount of positive responses to my post (outside of HN). Especially from women who feel like I expressed something that they are struggling with. We want to be taken seriously for our companies and our minds. All we want is to walk into the room and be an entrepreneur. Not a woman, or looked at through the lens of a "wife" or "mother" I don't know if it is the anonymity, but the discussion here seems so negative. With a lot of cheap shots at me, and hell of a lot of assumptions made. Really lacking in nuance and honestly- lacking in respect. This was hard for me to write. It has been hard for me to deal with and I didn't take a cheap shot at the VC. I could have ruined his life/career but I just wanted to make a point, and show people what women have to deal with in an honest and frank manner.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- hitekker 11y agoAre you still taking questions for the AMA you posted in the thread?
- sarahnadav 11y agoYes, I will keep checking in periodically
- thebiglebrewski 11y agoSee my other comment but I wanted to let you know that I am glad you posted this and I think there's a lot of value to pointing this kind of thing out. I have no idea what kind of business you're trying to start or whether or not it is a good or fundable idea but I do hope that you get to the finish line you're trying to get to - good luck!
- sarahnadav 11y agoThanks so much! I have a startup in stealth mode and it is funded. It is early days but this is my second funded startup and I see this as being much better than my first. I'll be making it all public soon. I closed my first startup because I didn't feel like I could fight on both levels- having to fight the odds to launch a successful company while fighting the industry itself. I could only come back in, if I came in swinging. So I am taking it all on and I feel ready for it now. That is why I am speaking my truth and willing to take the risks that come along with that. I hope that women coming after me can just launch their companies without having to deal with all of this crap.
- irascible 11y agoSeeing the text thread just reinforces my opinion that "VC's" are semi literate morons who happen to have stupid money. I'll be a programmer until the day I die, but FUCK that aspect of this industry. The information age was born in California, in the most liberal, feminist, and intelligent crucible of the Bay Area, and these shit weasels have come swooping in to scrape their money of the top. It absolutely sickens me, and I will jump with joy the day this bubble bursts and leaves these fuckers high and dry.
- marcusgarvey 11y agoJust curious: have any male founders here been asked the childcare question whilst pitching VCs?
- thebiglebrewski 11y agoJust writing this comment because I think @sarahnadav deserves some support here, from a dude (like myself), but also from the community in general! She is bringing some shit to light that may have not been seen before. If this is how one VC is, in one instance, maybe there's a lot that we're not seeing? This could be just the tip of the iceberg! Maybe other VCs could benefit from seeing this post and thinking, "I wouldn't want to be that guy in this conversation, what a jerk". I'm pretty upset that most of these comments (well, I guess most HN comments are like this) are trying to be so contrarian - why not just be supportive of something for once? Is the OP someone with a horrible track record of lying... ...or is she just a woman honestly trying to raise money and start a business, something many of the posters on here are trying to do as well?
- dennisgorelik 11y agoThis blog article is a good test of prospective startup founders. Ask startup founder what they think and you quickly know if you do not want to work with them.