4 ms·

With all due respect there have been 2-3 HN posts in the last few months about YC and HN being biased towards Stripe. Surely it cannot be so much smoke without

by nus07 5y ago

With all due respect there have been 2-3 HN posts in the last few months about YC and HN being biased towards Stripe. Surely it cannot be so much smoke without a fire.

dang 5y ago
That's bad logic in two ways. First, this is the internet. Smoke goes a lot further than that. Second, to the extent that the claims involve HN, (I'm being careful only to comment on facts I personally know about), they're definitely false [1]. So yes, for sure there can be that much fireless smoke. [1] I haven't had a chance to respond properly about those claims yet. Normally I'd have done it by now, but I'm on my phone with intermittent access at the moment, so am a lot slower and don't have my usual tools. Edit: I finally got it out - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30070287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30070287.
- dotcoma 5y ago
  dang, imho you’re trying too hard.
  - dang 5y ago
    Sorry, but if someone makes statements about HN or YC that I know to be false, I believe it's my job to correct them—especially since we can't treat this kind of post in the way we normally moderate HN (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20less%20%22not%20more%22%20yc&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...). What do you think I should do instead?
    - Kye 5y ago
      I can see someone who isn't convinced you're a fair operator taking the volume and detail of response as defensiveness, and that can look suspicious in a context like this. They aren't right, but I can understand the perspective.
      - CTmystery 5y ago
        > They aren't right, but I can understand the perspective. How? I'm curious. If someone makes accusations that you know to be false, wouldn't your best defense be a comprehensive refutation? What alternative do you see that would be more compelling? I, for one, really appreciate this level of detail, because the most common alternative is to attack back mercilessly without evidence. This tactic being commonly employed by politicians the world over.
        Kye 5y ago
        Most of the world's ills would be solved if facts and evidence were enough to convince people.
      - dang 5y ago
        I get it too. But when things get to that stage, literally anything you do will be taken as proof of the same nefariousness, whether you sink or you float. I think it makes more sense to focus on the much larger audience that's sincerely making up their mind, and give them good information with which to do it. Could I do that less defensively though? Absolutely. Not there yet.
    - infamia 5y ago
      When you have a fixed mindset, have chosen a side in a debate, and actively participate in a story where you have a vested self-interest, you cease to become what this community loves about you -- the impartial gardener of HN. At this point, you've become a YC defender and have abandoned your post as someone who could serve as a balanced arbiter. Surely, there are other people at YC who could comment on such matters for stories like this. That would be far, far better for you and HN (and probably YC too).
      - dang 5y ago
        I appreciate your comment! but I really don't think that's the right conclusion. I've been doing this for years—people know what to expect from me. I'd rather be up front about the fact that I care about HN and YC, and don't like to let false accusations go unanswered. To some extent it's a temperament thing. Past experiences (long before HN) have conditioned me to be a bit passionate in this department, and with a community like this one, which is extremely sensitive to the truth, I think it would be a bigger mistake to pretend otherwise. Probably a hugely bigger mistake, because what works best for me on HN is relating to people, and I can only do that by being myself. I've never claimed to be impartial and never would (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20unconscious%20bias&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). What I do claim is that (a) we try hard to be fair and to follow HN's principles, especially the one about intellectual curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) ; (b) we always answer questions truthfully, partly because it feels better that way and partly because it would be dumb not to (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=yc%20business%20interests%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...) ; and (c) we moderate HN less, not more, when YC or a YC startup is involved in a story (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20less%20%22not%20more%22%20yc&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...). That, by the way, is the only reason why this imaginary riler-upper spent 11 hours on HN's front page today. We'd never allow that normally—it goes against everything the site is supposed to be for. But I dutifully gritted my teeth and bore it, because that's the principle, and because I'm not about to trade a global optimum for a local one (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20goose%20golden%20egg&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...), even though it sucks to periodically get slimed like this.
    - hyeomans 5y ago
      I think people have already made their mind but if you want to share more information, I would suggest being 100% transparent and releasing any internal communication (emails/text/slack) about Bolt.
      - dang 5y ago
        I don't understand what sort of communication you're talking about. If you mean internal communication at the time (back in 2018), there wasn't any. If you mean internal communication yesterday - there was a bit (e.g. someone pointed me to the thread), but what value would there be in releasing it?
- nus07 5y ago
  Thank you . That was a fantastic and very detailed response. Obviously seeing a few of those posts made me think there was something to those insinuations so its good to get those clarified. Ball is now on Bolt founder's court to back up his claims otherwise its libel.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

by nus07 5y ago

With all due respect there have been 2-3 HN posts in the last few months about YC and HN being biased towards Stripe. Surely it cannot be so much smoke without a fire.

dang 5y ago

That's bad logic in two ways. First, this is the internet. Smoke goes a lot further than that. Second, to the extent that the claims involve HN, (I'm being careful only to comment on facts I personally know about), they're definitely false [1]. So yes, for sure there can be that much fireless smoke. [1] I haven't had a chance to respond properly about those claims yet. Normally I'd have done it by now, but I'm on my phone with intermittent access at the moment, so am a lot slower and don't have my usual tools. Edit: I finally got it out - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30070287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30070287.

dotcoma 5y ago
dang, imho you’re trying too hard.
- dang 5y ago
  Sorry, but if someone makes statements about HN or YC that I know to be false, I believe it's my job to correct them—especially since we can't treat this kind of post in the way we normally moderate HN (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20less%20%22not%20more%22%20yc&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...). What do you think I should do instead?
  - Kye 5y ago
    I can see someone who isn't convinced you're a fair operator taking the volume and detail of response as defensiveness, and that can look suspicious in a context like this. They aren't right, but I can understand the perspective.
    - CTmystery 5y ago
      > They aren't right, but I can understand the perspective. How? I'm curious. If someone makes accusations that you know to be false, wouldn't your best defense be a comprehensive refutation? What alternative do you see that would be more compelling? I, for one, really appreciate this level of detail, because the most common alternative is to attack back mercilessly without evidence. This tactic being commonly employed by politicians the world over.
      - Kye 5y ago
        Most of the world's ills would be solved if facts and evidence were enough to convince people.
    - dang 5y ago
      I get it too. But when things get to that stage, literally anything you do will be taken as proof of the same nefariousness, whether you sink or you float. I think it makes more sense to focus on the much larger audience that's sincerely making up their mind, and give them good information with which to do it. Could I do that less defensively though? Absolutely. Not there yet.
  - infamia 5y ago
    When you have a fixed mindset, have chosen a side in a debate, and actively participate in a story where you have a vested self-interest, you cease to become what this community loves about you -- the impartial gardener of HN. At this point, you've become a YC defender and have abandoned your post as someone who could serve as a balanced arbiter. Surely, there are other people at YC who could comment on such matters for stories like this. That would be far, far better for you and HN (and probably YC too).
    - dang 5y ago
      I appreciate your comment! but I really don't think that's the right conclusion. I've been doing this for years—people know what to expect from me. I'd rather be up front about the fact that I care about HN and YC, and don't like to let false accusations go unanswered. To some extent it's a temperament thing. Past experiences (long before HN) have conditioned me to be a bit passionate in this department, and with a community like this one, which is extremely sensitive to the truth, I think it would be a bigger mistake to pretend otherwise. Probably a hugely bigger mistake, because what works best for me on HN is relating to people, and I can only do that by being myself. I've never claimed to be impartial and never would (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20unconscious%20bias&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). What I do claim is that (a) we try hard to be fair and to follow HN's principles, especially the one about intellectual curiosity (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) ; (b) we always answer questions truthfully, partly because it feels better that way and partly because it would be dumb not to (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=yc%20business%20interests%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...) ; and (c) we moderate HN less, not more, when YC or a YC startup is involved in a story (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20less%20%22not%20more%22%20yc&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...). That, by the way, is the only reason why this imaginary riler-upper spent 11 hours on HN's front page today. We'd never allow that normally—it goes against everything the site is supposed to be for. But I dutifully gritted my teeth and bore it, because that's the principle, and because I'm not about to trade a global optimum for a local one (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20goose%20golden%20egg&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...), even though it sucks to periodically get slimed like this.
  - hyeomans 5y ago
    I think people have already made their mind but if you want to share more information, I would suggest being 100% transparent and releasing any internal communication (emails/text/slack) about Bolt.
    - dang 5y ago
      I don't understand what sort of communication you're talking about. If you mean internal communication at the time (back in 2018), there wasn't any. If you mean internal communication yesterday - there was a bit (e.g. someone pointed me to the thread), but what value would there be in releasing it?
nus07 5y ago
Thank you . That was a fantastic and very detailed response. Obviously seeing a few of those posts made me think there was something to those insinuations so its good to get those clarified. Ball is now on Bolt founder's court to back up his claims otherwise its libel.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]