3 ms·

I have a hunch it was the "assholes" comment that set you off, and led you to going back through a mental list of things he'd said that you disagreed with. For

I have a hunch it was the "assholes" comment that set you off, and led you to going back through a mental list of things he'd said that you disagreed with. For what it's worth, I think the original meaning behind that comment was clear, and that pg is now splitting a really fine hair in defending it. More broadly, that comment comes across as symptomatic of a peculiar attitude among some startups and programmers towards investors, angels, and other "business" people. Regardless of the intended meaning, there was no reason to use that word there. It didn't enforce or strengthen any point; putting "investors" in its place does the job just as well.

lisper 16y ago
> I have a hunch it was the "assholes" comment that set you off, and led you to going back through a mental list of things he'd said that you disagreed with. It was not that comment per se that "set me off", it's more the general trend at YC towards (how shall I put this to not fan the flames?) rhetoric that implies that there is something wrong with investors who exhibit reluctance, caution, or selectivity. It's been going on for some time now. I really started to notice it at the last Angel Day. The "asshole" comment was certainly the most egregious example of this, but if it had been an isolated incident I'm pretty sure I would have let it slide.