4 ms·
Reporting like this infuriates me - it's nothing more than gossip when presented this way: "He wore cargo shorts and a T-shirt to a meeting with Geodesic, a VC
by djrogers 5y ago
Reporting like this infuriates me - it's nothing more than gossip when presented this way:
"He wore cargo shorts and a T-shirt to a meeting with Geodesic, a VC firm founded by John Roos, a former U.S. ambassador to Japan. An Iterable board member later informed him Geodesic wouldn’t invest, implying it was partly because of his casual attire. A person familiar with the firm’s thinking says Zhu’s attire didn’t factor into the firm’s decision"
So was it the shorts or was it not the shorts? If the reporter has a solid source saying it wasn't the shorts, then why bring it up at all, unless the gossip aspect of it fits your narrative...
- gwern 5y agoThe anecdote is there to establish a pattern of sloppiness and carelessness and unnecessary risk-taking. Regardless of whether it, ex post, affected Geodesic's decision, it clearly could have affected it ex ante, and he should not have taken such a completely unnecessary risk, which helps establish his unfitness and why the LSD was the final straw/excuse.
- shard 5y agoI think it's good that the reporter is showing multiple viewpoints. Rarely is there one canonical view in situations like this. The implications here are that the Iterable board member had a personal discussion with a decision maker at Geodesic, and got the hint that they felt Zhu was disrespectful, which the board member attributed to the attire. The person familiar with Geodesic's thinking could be echoing the official line at Geodesic, as they know they are speaking with a reporter. The reporter shows both sides and stays neutral, letting us make up our minds ourselves.