4 ms·

Since I'm not sure if this is in response to me or just a general comment, I want to clarify that I don't personally think YC has much room to maneuver and I do

Since I'm not sure if this is in response to me or just a general comment, I want to clarify that I don't personally think YC has much room to maneuver and I don't think they should be the ones out in front of the story. I just think that articles like this one[1] have put them in a bind with respect to this story. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/airbnb.html http://www.paulgraham.com/airbnb.html

tptacek 15y ago
No part of this linked story has anything to do with the current drama. In fact, it's the opposite: that's Paul Graham saying that the thing he likes best about Airbnb is that they are likely to pivot away from Etsy-style small-ball with people's rooms and towards direct competition with hotels. I'm left with the impression that you think YC is in a bind here because you want them to be in a bind here. It sure is a lot more fun to talk about, isn't it?
- smhinsey 15y ago
  Of course it doesn't have anything to do with it directly, I'm talking about the perception created by that sort of story and the coverage it spawned. If you're on record talking about someone's positive qualities, and they make a mistake, or even are accused of making a mistake, that puts others in a position of expecting you to have a position on it. But they can't really take a public position on it beyond what pg's already said on the matter, and we see what good that did. This is the bind I am talking about. I don't want them to be in a bind. I have no feelings one way or the other about the matter, really, I am just attempting to offer my point of view on why people are clamoring for YC to be more vocal about this topic.
  - tptacek 15y ago
    Being on record saying positive things about someone or something does not put you in a bind when years later something bad happens with them. I liked John Edwards in 2007. The logic that involves YC in the Airbnb drama is juvenile. Sorry to be so blunt about it; I know nobody likes being called names.
    - smhinsey 15y ago
      As someone who donated to John Edwards's campaign in 2007, I can sympathize with that scenario. I don't think it's right, and maybe I have just been in DC too long, but this is how this sort of thing works in the media. I never said they owe an explanation to anyone or anything like that, but people are _clearly_ expecting one. Something set that expectation. Maybe this makes me juvenile, that's fine.
      - tptacek 15y ago
        When you say "I don't think that way, but other people clearly will", do you realize that you yourself are perpetuating the phenomenon?
        smhinsey 15y ago
        I am saying "I don't think this way, but I believe this is why others do." You can discuss an idea without supporting it.

tptacek 15y ago

No part of this linked story has anything to do with the current drama. In fact, it's the opposite: that's Paul Graham saying that the thing he likes best about Airbnb is that they are likely to pivot away from Etsy-style small-ball with people's rooms and towards direct competition with hotels. I'm left with the impression that you think YC is in a bind here because you want them to be in a bind here. It sure is a lot more fun to talk about, isn't it?

smhinsey 15y ago
Of course it doesn't have anything to do with it directly, I'm talking about the perception created by that sort of story and the coverage it spawned. If you're on record talking about someone's positive qualities, and they make a mistake, or even are accused of making a mistake, that puts others in a position of expecting you to have a position on it. But they can't really take a public position on it beyond what pg's already said on the matter, and we see what good that did. This is the bind I am talking about. I don't want them to be in a bind. I have no feelings one way or the other about the matter, really, I am just attempting to offer my point of view on why people are clamoring for YC to be more vocal about this topic.
- tptacek 15y ago
  Being on record saying positive things about someone or something does not put you in a bind when years later something bad happens with them. I liked John Edwards in 2007. The logic that involves YC in the Airbnb drama is juvenile. Sorry to be so blunt about it; I know nobody likes being called names.
  - smhinsey 15y ago
    As someone who donated to John Edwards's campaign in 2007, I can sympathize with that scenario. I don't think it's right, and maybe I have just been in DC too long, but this is how this sort of thing works in the media. I never said they owe an explanation to anyone or anything like that, but people are _clearly_ expecting one. Something set that expectation. Maybe this makes me juvenile, that's fine.
    - tptacek 15y ago
      When you say "I don't think that way, but other people clearly will", do you realize that you yourself are perpetuating the phenomenon?
      - smhinsey 15y ago
        I am saying "I don't think this way, but I believe this is why others do." You can discuss an idea without supporting it.