3 ms·

You're just digging yourself in deeper by trying to poke holes in these companies based on such incomplete information. You really would be wiser to reserve ju

by pg 17y ago

You're just digging yourself in deeper by trying to poke holes in these companies based on such incomplete information. You really would be wiser to reserve judgment on them. Startups are so volatile, and good startup ideas so often seem bad at first. You're setting yourself up to look foolish by dismissing them so quickly. What's the rush? Why don't you learn more about these companies before deciding about them?

fnid2 17y ago
If I was putting my time and money into them and had the same information on them that you do and had interviewed the candidates, it very well may be that I would pick the same companies you did -- who knows. Some of them I can't imagine picking, because the market doesn't interest me. I'm not digging myself into a hole, I'm making an assessment based on incomplete information, which is all that can be expected of me here and now. Why don't you stop using all the logical fallacies and insults?
- pg 17y ago
  When you have incomplete information, there is another option besides saying things that are, as a result, probably mistaken: to wait till you know more before you express an opinion.
  - fnid2 17y ago
    C'mon pg, this isn't that kind of forum. Posts are on the front page for a day at most, mostly a few hours or even minutes. You see a post, maybe read it, then write a comment. By the time I could get to know these companies, this thread will be long gone. If you like, I'll come sit with you for the next YC evaluations and provide my honest and informed opinions of the companies. There were only seven minutes for you to have read my long review of them and then compose your thoughts and reply. You put thoughts in my head without knowing me. You don't know what I know or what kinds of predictions I've made. You're doing the same thing to me that you are blasting me for doing to your selections. This thread has gone way beyond where I wanted. I was just posting a quick comment, man. I didn't want it to blow up like this. It was just an opinion and I don't know how to underail it. Usually, at this point, people tell me to just shut up, so that's what I'll do.
    - webwright 17y ago
      One way to do your best to "underail" it would be to NOT post a startup by startup list of why you think they are unimpressive. IMO, the three major problems I have with your opinion are: 1) You assume startups should be tackling new problems. I don't know if you noticed, but "me too" companies win more often than grand new ideas with deep technical problems on the web. Google, Facebook, Zynga, YouTube, Groupon and the iPod were me-too plays. 2) You assume startups should be (or look) technically impressive. There are plenty of great startups that aren't really deep technology problems (until they need to scale). 3) You're looking at 3-5 month old companies, for the most part. Craigslist at that age was a mailing list in SFO. You'd look smarter if you were talking about things like "total addressable market" and "scalability of customer acquisition" than how impressive the companies look right now. Startups of this age are still mostly just potential. The amount of time you invested in this screams "Troll" to me. The fact that you have had this happen enough that you say, "Usually, at this point, people tell me to just shut up, so that's what I'll do" seems to support that assessment. PG shouldn't be feeding you and neither should I, I guess. I'm mostly disappointed that your initial comment (devoid of any actual content) was upvoted by as many people as it was.
    - pg 17y ago
      It used to be that kind of forum.
      - kirse 17y ago
        I would say that what most people are doing in this thread (using all information available to them to make a best initial judgment), is exactly what you should have expected. This is basic human understanding - taking the available information and drawing a conclusion. I think it's a bit unfair to poke fun at names and such, but the commenters in this thread are performing the exact same process of evaluation and understanding as yourself, except the only difference is their information is quite limited. Yes, it's stupid and unwise to draw conclusions from incomplete information, but for the most part, that's what people do and (given the information), that's all they can do. If you want to avoid this in the future, I would say better PR and more information would help people avoid making such silly initial judgments and help to properly manage their expectations. Besides, if most people have low expectations for these startups, underpromising will only help in the future when they do deliver. And then you can deliver your I-told-ya-sos.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]

by pg 17y ago

fnid2 17y ago

If I was putting my time and money into them and had the same information on them that you do and had interviewed the candidates, it very well may be that I would pick the same companies you did -- who knows. Some of them I can't imagine picking, because the market doesn't interest me. I'm not digging myself into a hole, I'm making an assessment based on incomplete information, which is all that can be expected of me here and now. Why don't you stop using all the logical fallacies and insults?

pg 17y ago
When you have incomplete information, there is another option besides saying things that are, as a result, probably mistaken: to wait till you know more before you express an opinion.
- fnid2 17y ago
  C'mon pg, this isn't that kind of forum. Posts are on the front page for a day at most, mostly a few hours or even minutes. You see a post, maybe read it, then write a comment. By the time I could get to know these companies, this thread will be long gone. If you like, I'll come sit with you for the next YC evaluations and provide my honest and informed opinions of the companies. There were only seven minutes for you to have read my long review of them and then compose your thoughts and reply. You put thoughts in my head without knowing me. You don't know what I know or what kinds of predictions I've made. You're doing the same thing to me that you are blasting me for doing to your selections. This thread has gone way beyond where I wanted. I was just posting a quick comment, man. I didn't want it to blow up like this. It was just an opinion and I don't know how to underail it. Usually, at this point, people tell me to just shut up, so that's what I'll do.
  - webwright 17y ago
    One way to do your best to "underail" it would be to NOT post a startup by startup list of why you think they are unimpressive. IMO, the three major problems I have with your opinion are: 1) You assume startups should be tackling new problems. I don't know if you noticed, but "me too" companies win more often than grand new ideas with deep technical problems on the web. Google, Facebook, Zynga, YouTube, Groupon and the iPod were me-too plays. 2) You assume startups should be (or look) technically impressive. There are plenty of great startups that aren't really deep technology problems (until they need to scale). 3) You're looking at 3-5 month old companies, for the most part. Craigslist at that age was a mailing list in SFO. You'd look smarter if you were talking about things like "total addressable market" and "scalability of customer acquisition" than how impressive the companies look right now. Startups of this age are still mostly just potential. The amount of time you invested in this screams "Troll" to me. The fact that you have had this happen enough that you say, "Usually, at this point, people tell me to just shut up, so that's what I'll do" seems to support that assessment. PG shouldn't be feeding you and neither should I, I guess. I'm mostly disappointed that your initial comment (devoid of any actual content) was upvoted by as many people as it was.
  - pg 17y ago
    It used to be that kind of forum.
    - kirse 17y ago
      I would say that what most people are doing in this thread (using all information available to them to make a best initial judgment), is exactly what you should have expected. This is basic human understanding - taking the available information and drawing a conclusion. I think it's a bit unfair to poke fun at names and such, but the commenters in this thread are performing the exact same process of evaluation and understanding as yourself, except the only difference is their information is quite limited. Yes, it's stupid and unwise to draw conclusions from incomplete information, but for the most part, that's what people do and (given the information), that's all they can do. If you want to avoid this in the future, I would say better PR and more information would help people avoid making such silly initial judgments and help to properly manage their expectations. Besides, if most people have low expectations for these startups, underpromising will only help in the future when they do deliver. And then you can deliver your I-told-ya-sos.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]