6 ms·

Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that.

by pg 14y ago

niggler 14y ago
It's a very relevant fact (after all, this is a YC site and Coinbase is a YC company) that was explicitly removed by a moderator, and the action feels like dissociation. Can you present a better explanation?
- tptacek 14y ago
  I think when Paul Graham makes fun of you for suggesting the disassociation you have your answer.
  - auggierose 14y ago
    His answer can actually mean anything.
    - tptacek 14y ago
      Indeed, perhaps he just likes marshmallows.
      - niggler 14y ago
        What the parent meant was: "Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that." Could be A) sarcastic cover while distracting readers from the fact that there's no good reason (trying to get others to appeal to authority) B) there's a real reason which is sufficiently obvious that someone jumping to conspiracy is off-kilter If (B) were the situation, the "real reason" isn't obvious to me or to the parent (and I suspect you don't find it obvious either)
        tptacek 14y ago
        Hm. That is compelling logic. But, since you're right, that means YC is also distancing itself from Dropbox. And Airbnb. Holy, the whole thing is unraveling!
        niggler 14y ago
        Please point to an example of a criticism of AirBnB or of Dropbox in which the submission title originally had (YC '*) in it and was edited to remove the YC association. I and many other would like to see it.
        tptacek 14y ago
        "Many others would like to see it". It is the question of our times. The question of our times, by the way, is answerable with the search box at the bottom of the page.
        SilasX 14y ago
        Really? HN Search reveals the history of a link's title? That doesn't come up for me.
        niggler 14y ago
        tptacek has proven himself unable to reply without snark in this thread. I decided not to challenge the point
        tptacek 14y ago
        I think this is true, and that I have lost my ability to take this subthread seriously. But for the record, just go look for all the stories about YC companies that aren't labelled with "YCxxx".
- pg 14y ago
  That convention is for company names that appear in headlines of stories. HN is a news site, not a customer support forum for companies funded by YC, and in fact the site guidelines explicitly ask that it not be used that way: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Strictly speaking I should have killed the post entirely, but that would just have inflamed conspiracy theorists further.
  - niggler 14y ago
    "That convention is for company names that appear in headlines of stories." The guidelines state: "In titles, please don't describe things by their relation to YC unless they're actually associated with YC." AFAICT Coinbase is associated with YC, so the appearance makes perfect sense. "Strictly speaking I should have killed the post entirely" The real question is why it took an HN post that reached the frontpage to see any sort of response from coinbase. If you read the comments and the original assertion "because nobody trying to trade with Coinbase can get a public answer", it seems like people have tried other means and couldn't reach anyone at Coinbase.
    - gruseom 14y ago
      This is a lesson in how intellectual dishonesty works. You quote the HN guidelines, and you quote PG's reference to them ("strictly speaking...") but you omit the guideline to which he was obviously referring: please don't use HN posts to ask YC-funded companies questions that you could ask by emailing them. Instead you change the subject with "The real question is..." when, in fact, that wasn't the question. The question was about title changes. No doubt a dozen more "real questions" are waiting in the wings. There's no way PG can win this game of whack-a-troll. I'm surprised both that he even tries and that he doesn't snap more often. [Edit: deleted a dumb and superfluous bit here.]
      - niggler 14y ago
        "Instead you sneakily change the subject with "The real question is..." when, actually, that wasn't the question." You didn't read the parent posts, did you? You should review the conversation. The entire issue at hand is the fact that the title was changed. To summarize: joezydeco: a mod just deleted the "YC ('12)" off the headline https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428387 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428387 pg: Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428426 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428426 niggler: It's a very relevant fact (after all, this is a YC site and Coinbase is a YC company) that was explicitly removed by a moderator. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428449 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428449 In that context, what's being discussed is the renaming, for which PG replies by saying "That convention is for company names that appear in headlines of stories." and pointing to the news guidelines. The rest of the post is a non-sequitur. I replied by pointing to the only part of the guidelines that discuss titles. Now you tell me who is being intellectually dishonest :)
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
spindritf 14y ago
No, actually removing context from headlines, reverting them to original titles, or even completely changing the link target is a long-standing tradition on HN. It's not reserved for YC-related news. And it has been happening more often lately. Is that a policy now? It's not a big hurdle or anything but does take away a bit from the convenience of scanning new content. Those editorialized titles often contain the reason why a submission is relevant, or, like here, what is the "claim to fame" of participants... that's one of the benefits of having humans post those links.
- pg 14y ago
  http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5387864 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5387864

Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that.

by pg 14y ago

Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that.

It's a very relevant fact (after all, this is a YC site and Coinbase is a YC company) that was explicitly removed by a moderator, and the action feels like dissociation. Can you present a better explanation?

tptacek 14y ago
I think when Paul Graham makes fun of you for suggesting the disassociation you have your answer.
- auggierose 14y ago
  His answer can actually mean anything.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    Indeed, perhaps he just likes marshmallows.
    - niggler 14y ago
      What the parent meant was: "Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that." Could be A) sarcastic cover while distracting readers from the fact that there's no good reason (trying to get others to appeal to authority) B) there's a real reason which is sufficiently obvious that someone jumping to conspiracy is off-kilter If (B) were the situation, the "real reason" isn't obvious to me or to the parent (and I suspect you don't find it obvious either)
      - tptacek 14y ago
        Hm. That is compelling logic. But, since you're right, that means YC is also distancing itself from Dropbox. And Airbnb. Holy, the whole thing is unraveling!
        niggler 14y ago
        Please point to an example of a criticism of AirBnB or of Dropbox in which the submission title originally had (YC '*) in it and was edited to remove the YC association. I and many other would like to see it.
        tptacek 14y ago
        "Many others would like to see it". It is the question of our times. The question of our times, by the way, is answerable with the search box at the bottom of the page.
        SilasX 14y ago
        Really? HN Search reveals the history of a link's title? That doesn't come up for me.
        niggler 14y ago
        tptacek has proven himself unable to reply without snark in this thread. I decided not to challenge the point
        tptacek 14y ago
        I think this is true, and that I have lost my ability to take this subthread seriously. But for the record, just go look for all the stories about YC companies that aren't labelled with "YCxxx".
pg 14y ago
That convention is for company names that appear in headlines of stories. HN is a news site, not a customer support forum for companies funded by YC, and in fact the site guidelines explicitly ask that it not be used that way: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Strictly speaking I should have killed the post entirely, but that would just have inflamed conspiracy theorists further.
- niggler 14y ago
  "That convention is for company names that appear in headlines of stories." The guidelines state: "In titles, please don't describe things by their relation to YC unless they're actually associated with YC." AFAICT Coinbase is associated with YC, so the appearance makes perfect sense. "Strictly speaking I should have killed the post entirely" The real question is why it took an HN post that reached the frontpage to see any sort of response from coinbase. If you read the comments and the original assertion "because nobody trying to trade with Coinbase can get a public answer", it seems like people have tried other means and couldn't reach anyone at Coinbase.
  - gruseom 14y ago
    This is a lesson in how intellectual dishonesty works. You quote the HN guidelines, and you quote PG's reference to them ("strictly speaking...") but you omit the guideline to which he was obviously referring: please don't use HN posts to ask YC-funded companies questions that you could ask by emailing them. Instead you change the subject with "The real question is..." when, in fact, that wasn't the question. The question was about title changes. No doubt a dozen more "real questions" are waiting in the wings. There's no way PG can win this game of whack-a-troll. I'm surprised both that he even tries and that he doesn't snap more often. [Edit: deleted a dumb and superfluous bit here.]
    - niggler 14y ago
      "Instead you sneakily change the subject with "The real question is..." when, actually, that wasn't the question." You didn't read the parent posts, did you? You should review the conversation. The entire issue at hand is the fact that the title was changed. To summarize: joezydeco: a mod just deleted the "YC ('12)" off the headline https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428387 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428387 pg: Must mean that we're trying to hide the fact that we funded them, right? It could only mean that. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428426 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428426 niggler: It's a very relevant fact (after all, this is a YC site and Coinbase is a YC company) that was explicitly removed by a moderator. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428449 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5428449 In that context, what's being discussed is the renaming, for which PG replies by saying "That convention is for company names that appear in headlines of stories." and pointing to the news guidelines. The rest of the post is a non-sequitur. I replied by pointing to the only part of the guidelines that discuss titles. Now you tell me who is being intellectually dishonest :)

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

spindritf 14y ago

No, actually removing context from headlines, reverting them to original titles, or even completely changing the link target is a long-standing tradition on HN. It's not reserved for YC-related news. And it has been happening more often lately. Is that a policy now? It's not a big hurdle or anything but does take away a bit from the convenience of scanning new content. Those editorialized titles often contain the reason why a submission is relevant, or, like here, what is the "claim to fame" of participants... that's one of the benefits of having humans post those links.

pg 14y ago
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5387864 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5387864