4 ms·

Agreed. It feels like they're trying to claim that they were rejected for age... without providing any evidence. They don't want to come out and say it. But

Agreed. It feels like they're trying to claim that they were rejected for age... without providing any evidence. They don't want to come out and say it. But by suggesting enough, it's sure implied.

sillysaurusx 5y ago
What evidence would convince you? (It helps to imagine you're asking for evidence of gender discrimination.)
- whitepaint 5y ago
  If you accuse people of discrimination (which is a serious accusation) you better have very good evidence. Nothing less is acceptable.
  - void_mint 5y ago
    You didn't really answer the above question (What evidence would convince you)
    - whitepaint 5y ago
      Oh, you're right, I missed it. Hm, let's think together, it's a tough one, isn't it? Statistics? Let's say YC never invested in founders over 35. Would that be enough though? Maybe there are other reasons why people over 35 are not the greatest people to invest in and that's why they haven't done it? It's all hypothetical, but we can ask: in general, what proves discrimination? I for sure don't think the main post is evidence of anything, so I struggle to see how it's getting so popular.
      - void_mint 5y ago
        > it's a tough one For sure. > Statistics Bingo! YC certainly keeps stats on their acceptance info. They don't accept 99% of those that apply. What % of those that get accepted are over 35, compared to those that apply? What % aren't white men? Multiple founders? > I for sure don't think the main post is evidence of anything, so I struggle to see how it's getting so popular. Because OP has a reason to believe they were discriminated against. They ask the question to A.) See if others come forward, B.) Hope/expect YC to produce the statistics we just talked about, either proving or disproving a pattern of discriminatory behavior. And if YC knows they don't discriminate based on age, there should be absolutely no issue with them producing their data supporting that claim, right?
        whitepaint 5y ago
        And now you didn't answer the main question. Just because, let's say, stats showed they mostly invest in people under 35, does it mean they discriminate people over 35? If most of founders they invest in are white, does it mean they discriminate against asians, blacks etc.? What are the appropriate percentages that show no discrimination? 50% of everything? Once again, what proves discrimination? If someone is in for the money, would they be discriminate against a certain group of people? Or would they invest in people with the best ideas and the highest probability of success? What kind of investors would prevail over the long term?
        void_mint 5y ago
        I feel like you've begun sealioning. > Just because, let's say, stats showed they mostly invest in people under 35, does it mean they discriminate people over 35? It's about rates, not just raw numbers. If equal amounts of over 35 and under 35 applicants, and consistently YoY you're taking 90% under 35, very clearly you're discriminating against the over 35 category. > If most of founders they invest in are white, does it mean they discriminate against asians, blacks etc.? Again, if 30% of applicants are not-white and you accept 2% of them, when generalized success rate is 10%, yes it would again be pretty clear you're discriminating against the non-white category. > Once again, what proves discrimination? More sealioning. When a group of people intentionally select for or against a certain group, as is evidenced by patterns of behavior over long periods of time.
        whitepaint 5y ago
        > If equal amounts of over 35 and under 35 applicants, and consistently YoY you're taking 90% under 35 ... Could this scenario happen because of anything else besides discrimination from YC?
        void_mint 5y ago
        It's like any stats question. Depends entirely on your sample. With a reasonably sized sample, no, it really couldn't. Also this is more sealioning.
threatofrain 5y ago
IMO they had enough evidence to provide an implication, and so that's what we have. The implication. The ammunition comes from the fact that YC asks for your age very early in the process. Either that piece of information is relevant and worth asking... or it's not. That YC asks implies they want the info. But personally I don't think that's enough ammo to start a large forum discussion.
- giantg2 5y ago
  I think it's a fair question to ask. The author also brings up the difficulty in finding a job in the industry as he gets older. There are a number of people on here that have witnessed similar age-related or suspected age-related issues in this industry, to the point that this issue seems to be a common discussion point [1]. It would be different if they were writing a major editorial hit piece without hard facts. Perhaps this question will lead to YC releasing diversity stats and the reasoning behind the age question. 1. https://moguldom.com/9158/coding-while-old-race-and-sex-arent-the-only-isms-in-tech/ https://moguldom.com/9158/coding-while-old-race-and-sex-aren...

Agreed. It feels like they're trying to claim that they were rejected for age... without providing any evidence. They don't want to come out and say it. But by suggesting enough, it's sure implied.

sillysaurusx 5y ago

What evidence would convince you? (It helps to imagine you're asking for evidence of gender discrimination.)

whitepaint 5y ago
If you accuse people of discrimination (which is a serious accusation) you better have very good evidence. Nothing less is acceptable.
- void_mint 5y ago
  You didn't really answer the above question (What evidence would convince you)
  - whitepaint 5y ago
    Oh, you're right, I missed it. Hm, let's think together, it's a tough one, isn't it? Statistics? Let's say YC never invested in founders over 35. Would that be enough though? Maybe there are other reasons why people over 35 are not the greatest people to invest in and that's why they haven't done it? It's all hypothetical, but we can ask: in general, what proves discrimination? I for sure don't think the main post is evidence of anything, so I struggle to see how it's getting so popular.
    - void_mint 5y ago
      > it's a tough one For sure. > Statistics Bingo! YC certainly keeps stats on their acceptance info. They don't accept 99% of those that apply. What % of those that get accepted are over 35, compared to those that apply? What % aren't white men? Multiple founders? > I for sure don't think the main post is evidence of anything, so I struggle to see how it's getting so popular. Because OP has a reason to believe they were discriminated against. They ask the question to A.) See if others come forward, B.) Hope/expect YC to produce the statistics we just talked about, either proving or disproving a pattern of discriminatory behavior. And if YC knows they don't discriminate based on age, there should be absolutely no issue with them producing their data supporting that claim, right?
      - whitepaint 5y ago
        And now you didn't answer the main question. Just because, let's say, stats showed they mostly invest in people under 35, does it mean they discriminate people over 35? If most of founders they invest in are white, does it mean they discriminate against asians, blacks etc.? What are the appropriate percentages that show no discrimination? 50% of everything? Once again, what proves discrimination? If someone is in for the money, would they be discriminate against a certain group of people? Or would they invest in people with the best ideas and the highest probability of success? What kind of investors would prevail over the long term?
        void_mint 5y ago
        I feel like you've begun sealioning. > Just because, let's say, stats showed they mostly invest in people under 35, does it mean they discriminate people over 35? It's about rates, not just raw numbers. If equal amounts of over 35 and under 35 applicants, and consistently YoY you're taking 90% under 35, very clearly you're discriminating against the over 35 category. > If most of founders they invest in are white, does it mean they discriminate against asians, blacks etc.? Again, if 30% of applicants are not-white and you accept 2% of them, when generalized success rate is 10%, yes it would again be pretty clear you're discriminating against the non-white category. > Once again, what proves discrimination? More sealioning. When a group of people intentionally select for or against a certain group, as is evidenced by patterns of behavior over long periods of time.
        whitepaint 5y ago
        > If equal amounts of over 35 and under 35 applicants, and consistently YoY you're taking 90% under 35 ... Could this scenario happen because of anything else besides discrimination from YC?
        void_mint 5y ago
        It's like any stats question. Depends entirely on your sample. With a reasonably sized sample, no, it really couldn't. Also this is more sealioning.

threatofrain 5y ago

IMO they had enough evidence to provide an implication, and so that's what we have. The implication. The ammunition comes from the fact that YC asks for your age very early in the process. Either that piece of information is relevant and worth asking... or it's not. That YC asks implies they want the info. But personally I don't think that's enough ammo to start a large forum discussion.

giantg2 5y ago
I think it's a fair question to ask. The author also brings up the difficulty in finding a job in the industry as he gets older. There are a number of people on here that have witnessed similar age-related or suspected age-related issues in this industry, to the point that this issue seems to be a common discussion point [1]. It would be different if they were writing a major editorial hit piece without hard facts. Perhaps this question will lead to YC releasing diversity stats and the reasoning behind the age question. 1. https://moguldom.com/9158/coding-while-old-race-and-sex-arent-the-only-isms-in-tech/ https://moguldom.com/9158/coding-while-old-race-and-sex-aren...