5 ms·

You seem to continue to try to deliberately misunderstand this, but he is not a YC partner. He is a part-time partner, which means he spends a small fraction o

by sama 10y ago

You seem to continue to try to deliberately misunderstand this, but he is not a YC partner. He is a part-time partner, which means he spends a small fraction of his time advising YC companies, but does not have equity in YC.

idlewords 10y ago
The word partner is in his job title. From my perspective, this looks like the worst kind of weasely quibbling. The broader point is that Thiel does not come home from a hard day's work at the bit mines, counting on the YC paycheck to get him through the next payday. He's your business partner, however construed.
- brhsiao 10y ago
  I'm not understanding what exactly you want. If you're saying Sam should come out and say he disagrees with Thiel, he's already said he finds Trump repugnant. Are you saying that in addition to this, he also has to say, "I now draw attention to the fact that by opposing Trump, I am hereby disagreeing with my partner who supports him"? Why? And could it possibly also be because YC has other people in it, and disavowing a partner of YC by himself would be acting irresponsibly toward his partners? If you're saying YC as an institution should disavow Thiel's actions, is every company expected to choose a political stance, then disavow any partners who act against it? For that matter, it's disingenuous of you to point to an individual's tweets denouncing Trump, then to the fact that his organization hasn't done the same, and call it a lack of moral courage. It's also disingenuous to suggest, as you do in your tweets where you warn women and Muslims against joining YC, that because one of their partners donated to Trump and spoke at his convention, YC as an institution is now somehow poisoned with the views typical of a Trump supporter. Presumably Thiel was added as a partner for the simple reason that he is a valuable source of advice for startups. He can still be one as a keynote speaker for Trump. Besides, most people who endorse candidates, even people who act as keynote speakers, don't agree completely with their candidate, which further weakens your argument. Finally, I sometimes read your tweets, and I noticed you tweeted https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/787756601281085440 https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/787756601281085440 to Paul Graham's wife. Your usual sense of humor becomes weirdly aggressive when you write about YC, like you really want to pick a fight. What's your problem with them?
  - idlewords 10y ago
    I think that YC, in its official capacity, should disavow Thiel. I think it's morally incoherent for YC partners to declare Trump a national emergency and a threat to the republic while continuing to do business with one of his greatest backers, and not acknowledging the conflict. For whatever reason, YC has chosen to stay silent while one of its partners pours resources into a candidacy outside the bounds of normal political discourse in the US. This silence is very weird, especially considering the individual partners' alarmist comments about Trump. I don't think YC became poisoned with Thiel's views the moment he expressed them. They were poisoned by his views when they chose not to react in any way, and maintain their silence. I wonder what women, Muslims, veterans, etc. in this thread feel about the matter. To the point that Thiel doesn't completely endorse his candidate, I believe that argument is substantially weakened by his 1.25M donation coming after multiple accusations of sexual assault. Clearly Thiel is comfy enough in his support to disregard this, and the parade of horrors that preceded it. I accept that I may be starting to sound a bit nasty. I consider what is happening a display of spinelessness, and the arguments being marshaled in its defense disingenuous. It makes me angry.
    - brhsiao 10y ago
      I understand where you're coming from, but you didn't address this point: > For that matter, it's disingenuous of you to point to an individual's tweets denouncing Trump, then to the fact that his organization hasn't done the same, and call it a lack of moral courage. YC has multiple partners, and for them to disavow Thiel as a whole would require them to conspire, behind Thiel's back, to reach an agreement on this. That seems iffy. Is it really not enough that Sam has individually come out against Trump? Is it really moral incoherence that he hasn't rallied his entire organization behind him on this? I do wonder whether female and Muslim YC founders ever receive advice from Thiel, and how they feel about it. But I suspect most accept that he's a smart guy, and that at the end of the day, they can part ways in disagreement but a few pieces of good advice richer. Or maybe not. I'd be interested in hearing about someone's experience here.
      - idlewords 10y ago
hawkice 10y ago
I guess I don't understand. Part-time is a modifier on the nature of the partnership, isn't it? It's different than being a full-time partner, but wouldn't it be a subset of "partner"?
- sama 10y ago
  I understand the confusion since they share a word, but they are entirely different. EG part-time partners don't have a legal vote in the direction of YC.
  - zorpner 10y ago
    EG part-time partners don't have a legal vote in the direction of YC. So, much like how he interacts with the Trump campaign, he provides capital in exchange for...?
  - idlewords 10y ago
    Weak, weak, weak.
    - MrMcDowall 10y ago
      Simplify!
      - idlewords 10y ago
        Weak!
  - johndavi 10y ago
    If anything this makes -- should have made -- taking a principled stand drastically easier. It also doesn't follow that a defense then could ever be "we won't fire..." He's not an employee nor a YC vote-carrier nor an equity holder that you seemingly can fire.
  - hawkice 10y ago
    So it would be fairer to say "Part-time Partner" is the name of a role, like "Limited Partner", that sounds like a variation of Partner but is in fact a completely different role with different duties and privileges? This sounds very likely but is hard to deduce from the blog posts. [EDIT: To be more specific: Here (https://blog.ycombinator.com/diversity-and-startups https://blog.ycombinator.com/diversity-and-startups) you mention: "My hope is that YC has enough leverage at this point to make it clear that [inappropriate behavior towards female founders] is unacceptable and we will not continue to work with investors who do it." The whole post is great and speaks to the role you (meaning YC in general) feel it is important to play in supporting women, minority and more generally, 'outsider' founders. The quote illustrates you've not ruled out severing business ties to investors who make 'outsider' founders uncomfortable. Here (http://blog.samaltman.com/trump http://blog.samaltman.com/trump), you are talking about Trump: "Demagogic hate-mongers lead down terrible paths. It would be particularly embarrassing for us to fall for this[.]" In the same piece about Trump, you reference Trump's policy regarding 'outsiders' in particular, and the famous quote, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." You also state "This would be a good time for us all—even Republicans, especially Republican politicians who previously endorsed Trump—to start speaking up." The primary confusion is that, despite the fact "[you]’ve supported some Republicans in the past", you _aren't_ speaking up and clarifying the impact of a major Trump surrogate with a potentially misleading(?) title within YC itself. So while some others are indicating you're engaged in pedantry, I am actually very interested in the exact role of various YC partner or partner-esque people. I think this is a case where details might matter, but so far YC has been oddly silent. To the extent such a confusion can be averted, I'd be interested in your thoughts, but appreciate this can be quite a needle to thread.]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
prestemon 10y ago
Are you okay if minority-run and immigrant startups feel less welcome at a company with a part time partner who funds an anti-immigrant-focused presidential campaign? Do you think it should be clearer that YC violently disagrees with those views of the candidate your part time partner gives (some money he got from YC) to? (Assuming YC as a business doesn't think Muslims and refugees and other immigrants should be kept out of the country.)
tptacek 10y ago
I know everyone else is picking this comment apart, but I see a glimmer of potential progress in it. When you say that the distinction between "part time partner" and "partner" is an important one, can I also take you to mean that you would be reluctant to allow Thiel to extend his role in YC into full partnership, if he should want to do that in the future? At least, not while he continues to play the kind of role in American politics that he's playing today?
newbie567 10y ago
This is dishonest.
newbie567 10y ago
This is dishonest. Share with the community how Thiel's capital enabled PG's buyout.
evolve2k 10y ago
As any sort of 'partner' is he representative of the world you folks are out to create and the values you stand for? Because if not your organisation is being judged on who you say are members of your team; part-time, equity supported or otherwise.
chx 10y ago
> he spends a small fraction of his time advising YC companies And you are comfortable with him doing so? What if the YC company is led by a Muslim woman? Do you think she would be comfortable advised by a person who aligns with Trump? Honestly, after the Gizmodo affair you should've cut ties with him which should've been rather easy: not an employee, not an owner, so why don't you say, we do not want to do anything to do with this person? Where does this stop? What can one do that would make you disavow him? Because clearly being a danger to free speech himself and endorsing and financing the biggest danger to the republic right now is not enough for you.
ljw1001 10y ago
That doesn't make him an employee - so your talk of "firing" him is still misleading.
chx 10y ago
For the downvoters who do not get it: let's presume a woman gets into YC and Thiel advises her. It's a one-on-one. Do you think it's unreasonable if the woman begins to think whether Thiel "only" supports with money and words Trump or is an ardent follower of his action and makes a crude pass at her or worse? Given the power situation here, do you think a victim would come forward? Aware of the answer of this question, do you think a woman would want to get into YC in the first place? Is it a safe place for women after this? Educate me if I am wrong, not just downvote blindly, thanks!

by sama 10y ago

idlewords 10y ago

The word partner is in his job title. From my perspective, this looks like the worst kind of weasely quibbling. The broader point is that Thiel does not come home from a hard day's work at the bit mines, counting on the YC paycheck to get him through the next payday. He's your business partner, however construed.

brhsiao 10y ago
I'm not understanding what exactly you want. If you're saying Sam should come out and say he disagrees with Thiel, he's already said he finds Trump repugnant. Are you saying that in addition to this, he also has to say, "I now draw attention to the fact that by opposing Trump, I am hereby disagreeing with my partner who supports him"? Why? And could it possibly also be because YC has other people in it, and disavowing a partner of YC by himself would be acting irresponsibly toward his partners? If you're saying YC as an institution should disavow Thiel's actions, is every company expected to choose a political stance, then disavow any partners who act against it? For that matter, it's disingenuous of you to point to an individual's tweets denouncing Trump, then to the fact that his organization hasn't done the same, and call it a lack of moral courage. It's also disingenuous to suggest, as you do in your tweets where you warn women and Muslims against joining YC, that because one of their partners donated to Trump and spoke at his convention, YC as an institution is now somehow poisoned with the views typical of a Trump supporter. Presumably Thiel was added as a partner for the simple reason that he is a valuable source of advice for startups. He can still be one as a keynote speaker for Trump. Besides, most people who endorse candidates, even people who act as keynote speakers, don't agree completely with their candidate, which further weakens your argument. Finally, I sometimes read your tweets, and I noticed you tweeted https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/787756601281085440 https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/787756601281085440 to Paul Graham's wife. Your usual sense of humor becomes weirdly aggressive when you write about YC, like you really want to pick a fight. What's your problem with them?
- idlewords 10y ago
  I think that YC, in its official capacity, should disavow Thiel. I think it's morally incoherent for YC partners to declare Trump a national emergency and a threat to the republic while continuing to do business with one of his greatest backers, and not acknowledging the conflict. For whatever reason, YC has chosen to stay silent while one of its partners pours resources into a candidacy outside the bounds of normal political discourse in the US. This silence is very weird, especially considering the individual partners' alarmist comments about Trump. I don't think YC became poisoned with Thiel's views the moment he expressed them. They were poisoned by his views when they chose not to react in any way, and maintain their silence. I wonder what women, Muslims, veterans, etc. in this thread feel about the matter. To the point that Thiel doesn't completely endorse his candidate, I believe that argument is substantially weakened by his 1.25M donation coming after multiple accusations of sexual assault. Clearly Thiel is comfy enough in his support to disregard this, and the parade of horrors that preceded it. I accept that I may be starting to sound a bit nasty. I consider what is happening a display of spinelessness, and the arguments being marshaled in its defense disingenuous. It makes me angry.
  - brhsiao 10y ago
    I understand where you're coming from, but you didn't address this point: > For that matter, it's disingenuous of you to point to an individual's tweets denouncing Trump, then to the fact that his organization hasn't done the same, and call it a lack of moral courage. YC has multiple partners, and for them to disavow Thiel as a whole would require them to conspire, behind Thiel's back, to reach an agreement on this. That seems iffy. Is it really not enough that Sam has individually come out against Trump? Is it really moral incoherence that he hasn't rallied his entire organization behind him on this? I do wonder whether female and Muslim YC founders ever receive advice from Thiel, and how they feel about it. But I suspect most accept that he's a smart guy, and that at the end of the day, they can part ways in disagreement but a few pieces of good advice richer. Or maybe not. I'd be interested in hearing about someone's experience here.
    - idlewords 10y ago

hawkice 10y ago

I guess I don't understand. Part-time is a modifier on the nature of the partnership, isn't it? It's different than being a full-time partner, but wouldn't it be a subset of "partner"?

sama 10y ago
I understand the confusion since they share a word, but they are entirely different. EG part-time partners don't have a legal vote in the direction of YC.
- zorpner 10y ago
  EG part-time partners don't have a legal vote in the direction of YC. So, much like how he interacts with the Trump campaign, he provides capital in exchange for...?
- idlewords 10y ago
  Weak, weak, weak.
  - MrMcDowall 10y ago
    Simplify!
    - idlewords 10y ago
      Weak!
- johndavi 10y ago
  If anything this makes -- should have made -- taking a principled stand drastically easier. It also doesn't follow that a defense then could ever be "we won't fire..." He's not an employee nor a YC vote-carrier nor an equity holder that you seemingly can fire.
- hawkice 10y ago
  So it would be fairer to say "Part-time Partner" is the name of a role, like "Limited Partner", that sounds like a variation of Partner but is in fact a completely different role with different duties and privileges? This sounds very likely but is hard to deduce from the blog posts. [EDIT: To be more specific: Here (https://blog.ycombinator.com/diversity-and-startups https://blog.ycombinator.com/diversity-and-startups) you mention: "My hope is that YC has enough leverage at this point to make it clear that [inappropriate behavior towards female founders] is unacceptable and we will not continue to work with investors who do it." The whole post is great and speaks to the role you (meaning YC in general) feel it is important to play in supporting women, minority and more generally, 'outsider' founders. The quote illustrates you've not ruled out severing business ties to investors who make 'outsider' founders uncomfortable. Here (http://blog.samaltman.com/trump http://blog.samaltman.com/trump), you are talking about Trump: "Demagogic hate-mongers lead down terrible paths. It would be particularly embarrassing for us to fall for this[.]" In the same piece about Trump, you reference Trump's policy regarding 'outsiders' in particular, and the famous quote, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." You also state "This would be a good time for us all—even Republicans, especially Republican politicians who previously endorsed Trump—to start speaking up." The primary confusion is that, despite the fact "[you]’ve supported some Republicans in the past", you _aren't_ speaking up and clarifying the impact of a major Trump surrogate with a potentially misleading(?) title within YC itself. So while some others are indicating you're engaged in pedantry, I am actually very interested in the exact role of various YC partner or partner-esque people. I think this is a case where details might matter, but so far YC has been oddly silent. To the extent such a confusion can be averted, I'd be interested in your thoughts, but appreciate this can be quite a needle to thread.]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

prestemon 10y ago

Are you okay if minority-run and immigrant startups feel less welcome at a company with a part time partner who funds an anti-immigrant-focused presidential campaign? Do you think it should be clearer that YC violently disagrees with those views of the candidate your part time partner gives (some money he got from YC) to? (Assuming YC as a business doesn't think Muslims and refugees and other immigrants should be kept out of the country.)

tptacek 10y ago

I know everyone else is picking this comment apart, but I see a glimmer of potential progress in it. When you say that the distinction between "part time partner" and "partner" is an important one, can I also take you to mean that you would be reluctant to allow Thiel to extend his role in YC into full partnership, if he should want to do that in the future? At least, not while he continues to play the kind of role in American politics that he's playing today?

newbie567 10y ago

This is dishonest.

newbie567 10y ago

This is dishonest. Share with the community how Thiel's capital enabled PG's buyout.

evolve2k 10y ago

As any sort of 'partner' is he representative of the world you folks are out to create and the values you stand for? Because if not your organisation is being judged on who you say are members of your team; part-time, equity supported or otherwise.

chx 10y ago

> he spends a small fraction of his time advising YC companies And you are comfortable with him doing so? What if the YC company is led by a Muslim woman? Do you think she would be comfortable advised by a person who aligns with Trump? Honestly, after the Gizmodo affair you should've cut ties with him which should've been rather easy: not an employee, not an owner, so why don't you say, we do not want to do anything to do with this person? Where does this stop? What can one do that would make you disavow him? Because clearly being a danger to free speech himself and endorsing and financing the biggest danger to the republic right now is not enough for you.

ljw1001 10y ago

That doesn't make him an employee - so your talk of "firing" him is still misleading.

chx 10y ago

For the downvoters who do not get it: let's presume a woman gets into YC and Thiel advises her. It's a one-on-one. Do you think it's unreasonable if the woman begins to think whether Thiel "only" supports with money and words Trump or is an ardent follower of his action and makes a crude pass at her or worse? Given the power situation here, do you think a victim would come forward? Aware of the answer of this question, do you think a woman would want to get into YC in the first place? Is it a safe place for women after this? Educate me if I am wrong, not just downvote blindly, thanks!