4 ms·

First, he was applying for a marketing position. A position that demands creativity and the ability to stand out and be noticed...so, essentially he proved hims

First, he was applying for a marketing position. A position that demands creativity and the ability to stand out and be noticed...so, essentially he proved himself with this gimmick. In other words, this wasnt just a gimmick but rather a demonstration of his skills. It just like an engineer getting interviewed after finding a bug in your code. On a more critical note, applying for a job is a zero sum game. Only one person gets hired. If you are more concerned with rules and respecting other applications by not standing out, you are just playing the game poorly. Your job as an applicant is to a)get noticed and b)beat out everyone else for the job. All this is to say that if followong the rules are so important in your organization, this guy is a bad fit. If it requires scrappiness, creativity, and "hacker" mentality, it is a perfect fit. In this case, as a marketer, it was brilliant!

whybroke 10y ago
>If you are more concerned with rules and respecting other applications by not standing out, you are just playing the game poorly. So say sleeping with people from HR is ok? Either we have social norms, fairness and an (attempt at) a rational system or we don't. And btw, the behavior you reward is the one you get. So expect a hell of a lot of donuts over the next year.
- davemel37 10y ago
  >So say sleeping with people from HR is ok? Do you really equate sleeping with HR to getting noticed by delivering donuts to executives? I want to point you to Paul Graham's essay about what they look for in Founders. Specifically, "They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter." http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html 4. Naughtiness Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's why I'd use the word naughty rather than evil. They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter. This quality may be redundant though; it may be implied by imagination. Sam Altman of Loopt is one of the most successful alumni, so we asked him what question we could put on the Y Combinator application that would help us discover more people like him. He said to ask about a time when they'd hacked something to their advantage—hacked in the sense of beating the system, not breaking into computers. It has become one of the questions we pay most attention to when judging applications.
  - GuiA 10y ago
    Yeah, so the thing about stuff like this is that it is inherently classist. There are 2 things at play here: - knowing what rules are permissible to break highly depends on your upbringing and social status. In other words, "the rules that don't matter" for Paul Graham are the rules that don't matter for a rich old white dude. - it's much easier to break the rules when you know that there will be no consequences because of your wealth/social status . Kids whose parents paid for a Stanford education will "delight in breaking rules" much more than the hard working kid from immigrant parents desperate to fit in in a world where no one looks like her. This is exactly the kind of privileged rhetoric that people who push for more diversity and sensitivity in Silicon Valley and tech are trying to highlight/stave off.
    - davemel37 10y ago
      I think you are making some pretty broad assumptions about a whole bunch of things. First, this very article is about an immigrant, with no status, money or connections, creating opportunity for himself. Obviously, I am gonna be somewhat biased by my own upbringing, so I can't be truly objective (other than knowing that I grew up in a vastly different upbringing that the folks you describe, yet still feel there are some rules that should be broken and others that shouldn't be crossed. My only two points I would make are: 1. YC Funds a pretty diverse crowd from all over the world if I understand correctly (I have no direct knowledge.) 2. Founding a successful startup isn't for everyone, and maybe it favors some over others due to life circumstances, but that doesn't change the reality that to innovate and succeed, you might need that "naughty" mentality, regardless of whether it came from a place of privilege or not. Finally, In my experience, persistence is by far a more important trait for success than almost anything else, and the most driven, focused, persistent people are often the ones that fought against all odds to break free from their underprivileged circumstances, much like the immigrant you described. I am not sure they feel a need to play by arbitrary rules or not, but even if they do, they often rise above through sheer force of will...and often that persistence, and will power brings them to do things that open doors by ignoring propriety and breaking down barriers and limitations that live in their head more than anywhere else. I might be biased about all sorts of privilege and might be blind to the class bias you refer to, I do not know...but my gut and experience tell me that individuals and their personal decisions matter much more than their class and circumstances. (Not discounting those other factors, just discounting the role they actually play in reality relative their own choices and of course colored by my own bias.)
holografix 10y ago
Thanks for your comment you make a good point in that he is applying for a marketing job and his attitude can be perceived as a great example of guerrilla marketing. However I think you're treading a thin line by focusing solely on the desired outcome of one individual. If everyone thought like that'd it'd be a race towards some pretty unethical and/or immoral behaviours. This "what matters is that we got ours" mentality can lead to a lot of resentment. But again thank you for your response.
- sangnoir 10y ago
  > However I think you're treading a thin line by focusing solely on the desired outcome of one individual When you apply for a position, are you doing it for the "greater good" or will you have a desired outcome for one individual- that is yourself? There are so many different ways to skip the hiring pipeline that are widely accepted: would you consider recommendations from current employees or acqhiring as unfair?
- davemel37 10y ago
  >If everyone thought like that'd it'd be a race towards some pretty unethical and/or immoral behaviours. Strategies like this have been around for decades, yet somehow most people are NOT willing to put in the extra work to execute on it. Donny Deutsch did something similar, "Donny pitched a TV account, Tri-State Pontiac dealers. (Just to get into the pitch, Donny sent car parts to the home of the Pontiac rep. He sent a fender with a note that read, “We’ll cover your rear end.” http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/n_8669/ http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/n_8669/ There was that fellow who ran linkedin ads to get investors attention to get into Angelpad http://thehustle.co/the-linkedin-hack-that-made-me-120000 http://thehustle.co/the-linkedin-hack-that-made-me-120000 8 Years ago I was trying to get an interview at Neo@Ogilvy as a search marketer. I sent my resume several times with no results. I spent the extra time to really think about what would make me stand out and I designed my resume to look like a search results page and got a call from them within 10 hours of applying. This was because the key to advertising design is imagery that supports the message. It demonstrated my appreciation of the nuances of effective advertising. Direct mail marketers have been promoting Lumpy Mail or 3D Mail as a way to make sure your mailer gets noticed, opened, and read. (i.e. putting bulky thinks in the mail so It can't be put on the bottom of a junk mail pile.) These are not really even hacks, it is one of the rules of the game. If you go the extra mile demonstrating you care enough to stand out, you earned the attention you get. I don't think these tactics are a slippery slope at all. It's no different than Sam Altman flying across the country to meet a company (that didnt want to meet with him) that was about to sign with a competitor, or PokerShare.com training a Chimp to play poker and bring it on tour. There is a world of difference between being clever and being unethical. Edit: Grammar

whybroke 10y ago

>If you are more concerned with rules and respecting other applications by not standing out, you are just playing the game poorly. So say sleeping with people from HR is ok? Either we have social norms, fairness and an (attempt at) a rational system or we don't. And btw, the behavior you reward is the one you get. So expect a hell of a lot of donuts over the next year.

davemel37 10y ago
>So say sleeping with people from HR is ok? Do you really equate sleeping with HR to getting noticed by delivering donuts to executives? I want to point you to Paul Graham's essay about what they look for in Founders. Specifically, "They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter." http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html http://www.paulgraham.com/founders.html 4. Naughtiness Though the most successful founders are usually good people, they tend to have a piratical gleam in their eye. They're not Goody Two-Shoes type good. Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's why I'd use the word naughty rather than evil. They delight in breaking rules, but not rules that matter. This quality may be redundant though; it may be implied by imagination. Sam Altman of Loopt is one of the most successful alumni, so we asked him what question we could put on the Y Combinator application that would help us discover more people like him. He said to ask about a time when they'd hacked something to their advantage—hacked in the sense of beating the system, not breaking into computers. It has become one of the questions we pay most attention to when judging applications.
- GuiA 10y ago
  Yeah, so the thing about stuff like this is that it is inherently classist. There are 2 things at play here: - knowing what rules are permissible to break highly depends on your upbringing and social status. In other words, "the rules that don't matter" for Paul Graham are the rules that don't matter for a rich old white dude. - it's much easier to break the rules when you know that there will be no consequences because of your wealth/social status . Kids whose parents paid for a Stanford education will "delight in breaking rules" much more than the hard working kid from immigrant parents desperate to fit in in a world where no one looks like her. This is exactly the kind of privileged rhetoric that people who push for more diversity and sensitivity in Silicon Valley and tech are trying to highlight/stave off.
  - davemel37 10y ago
    I think you are making some pretty broad assumptions about a whole bunch of things. First, this very article is about an immigrant, with no status, money or connections, creating opportunity for himself. Obviously, I am gonna be somewhat biased by my own upbringing, so I can't be truly objective (other than knowing that I grew up in a vastly different upbringing that the folks you describe, yet still feel there are some rules that should be broken and others that shouldn't be crossed. My only two points I would make are: 1. YC Funds a pretty diverse crowd from all over the world if I understand correctly (I have no direct knowledge.) 2. Founding a successful startup isn't for everyone, and maybe it favors some over others due to life circumstances, but that doesn't change the reality that to innovate and succeed, you might need that "naughty" mentality, regardless of whether it came from a place of privilege or not. Finally, In my experience, persistence is by far a more important trait for success than almost anything else, and the most driven, focused, persistent people are often the ones that fought against all odds to break free from their underprivileged circumstances, much like the immigrant you described. I am not sure they feel a need to play by arbitrary rules or not, but even if they do, they often rise above through sheer force of will...and often that persistence, and will power brings them to do things that open doors by ignoring propriety and breaking down barriers and limitations that live in their head more than anywhere else. I might be biased about all sorts of privilege and might be blind to the class bias you refer to, I do not know...but my gut and experience tell me that individuals and their personal decisions matter much more than their class and circumstances. (Not discounting those other factors, just discounting the role they actually play in reality relative their own choices and of course colored by my own bias.)

holografix 10y ago

Thanks for your comment you make a good point in that he is applying for a marketing job and his attitude can be perceived as a great example of guerrilla marketing. However I think you're treading a thin line by focusing solely on the desired outcome of one individual. If everyone thought like that'd it'd be a race towards some pretty unethical and/or immoral behaviours. This "what matters is that we got ours" mentality can lead to a lot of resentment. But again thank you for your response.

sangnoir 10y ago
> However I think you're treading a thin line by focusing solely on the desired outcome of one individual When you apply for a position, are you doing it for the "greater good" or will you have a desired outcome for one individual- that is yourself? There are so many different ways to skip the hiring pipeline that are widely accepted: would you consider recommendations from current employees or acqhiring as unfair?
davemel37 10y ago
>If everyone thought like that'd it'd be a race towards some pretty unethical and/or immoral behaviours. Strategies like this have been around for decades, yet somehow most people are NOT willing to put in the extra work to execute on it. Donny Deutsch did something similar, "Donny pitched a TV account, Tri-State Pontiac dealers. (Just to get into the pitch, Donny sent car parts to the home of the Pontiac rep. He sent a fender with a note that read, “We’ll cover your rear end.” http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/n_8669/ http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/n_8669/ There was that fellow who ran linkedin ads to get investors attention to get into Angelpad http://thehustle.co/the-linkedin-hack-that-made-me-120000 http://thehustle.co/the-linkedin-hack-that-made-me-120000 8 Years ago I was trying to get an interview at Neo@Ogilvy as a search marketer. I sent my resume several times with no results. I spent the extra time to really think about what would make me stand out and I designed my resume to look like a search results page and got a call from them within 10 hours of applying. This was because the key to advertising design is imagery that supports the message. It demonstrated my appreciation of the nuances of effective advertising. Direct mail marketers have been promoting Lumpy Mail or 3D Mail as a way to make sure your mailer gets noticed, opened, and read. (i.e. putting bulky thinks in the mail so It can't be put on the bottom of a junk mail pile.) These are not really even hacks, it is one of the rules of the game. If you go the extra mile demonstrating you care enough to stand out, you earned the attention you get. I don't think these tactics are a slippery slope at all. It's no different than Sam Altman flying across the country to meet a company (that didnt want to meet with him) that was about to sign with a competitor, or PokerShare.com training a Chimp to play poker and bring it on tour. There is a world of difference between being clever and being unethical. Edit: Grammar