3 ms·

This 'rejection without a stated reason' is common practice - and poor practice wherever it may be found, ie recruitment, vc, men/women relationships, record co

This 'rejection without a stated reason' is common practice - and poor practice wherever it may be found, ie recruitment, vc, men/women relationships, record companies and many places else. The ease by which even minimal feedback can be given which can lead to great benefit to the recipient is obvious, and therefore should be embraced. There may be risks that the recipient makes some kind of rebuttal and wastes time, the reasoning itself behind the rejection causes bad publicity or the feedback process takes time however the benefits to the [in this case YC] ecosystem I think outweigh the disadvantages.

pg 19y ago
poor practice wherever it may be found Sure you want to commit to that blanket statement? Do you expect every woman in every room you walk into to stop and think about why you didn't draw her attention, and then come and tell you?
- neuro 19y ago
  so, are you suggesting canidates demo in spandex?
- adrianwaj 19y ago
  It's a generalized statement about a principle. See my remark below (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68962 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68962) about publishers/authors.
- nailer 19y ago
  I can't speak for adrianwaj, but here's my approach: In general, I'm not seeking sexual interest from every woman in the room. In fact, there's quite a few I'm specifically seeking to avoid. For those I am interested in, I make every effort to look good and be an engaging, interesting person. I'm fit, I dress well, I'm good looking and can engage strangers in conversation easily, and usually make them laugh. If a woman I'm interested in still isn't interested in me after I've engaged her (and provided I'm still interested in her after the conversing with her) I ask myself why. If I don't know the answer, I think it's quite reasonable to politely ask her. Conversely, though, I'm prepared to accept her reasons why. For example, she might believe that I'm rough, but even if I know this not to be the case, I know there's a reason for this perception. Or she might prefer something I'm not willing to be - eg, really big guys - I'm tall and thin and can't be bothered spending more than a few days at the gym. Fair enough, it would have never worked out. But sometimes I find out something that's really valuable, and I can take that and work on it. I have to be in a frame of mind that makes her comfortable to be honest and direct. Unfortunately, there's probably a lot of guys who don't realize there's a reason behind her perception, or who would argue about why they're they the right guy. These guys make it hard for girls to be honest for those of us who are interested in the basis for a perception, rather using it as a pretext to continuing to attempt to be accepted. These also have no idea how many other great looking, witty girls there are, and put too much value on one opinion. Everything above is applicable to YCombinator.
DanielBMarkham 19y ago
Not trying to pile on, but I'm curious to what sort of feedback "nothing in there really caught our eye" would engender. A request for YC to look more closely? I mean, at some point these are qualitative measurements. Even if you had absolute knowledge, it wouldn't make things any better. Did the reviewer have a bad burrito for lunch? Is your name Bob and the reviewer unconsciously hates all people named Bob? Was there a great application just before yours, and even though yours might be acceptable, by comparison it didn't look so good? Were you the first ones evaluated (reviewers are notorious for rejecting early applicants) I exaggerate, of course, but whatever reason you get I can guarantee won't be satisfying. I mean, you can go to the store tomorrow and pick up a huge stack of books on selling, which all boil down to "Sometimes you strike out for no reason at all. Keep trying" In a vain attempt to pump readers for money, some books give you a huge list of reasons for why you can strike out. I'm a firm believer in controlling all those factors you can -- wear the power tie, turn the temperature down in the office, sit in the proper locations in an important meeting, use body language and NLP, show instead of tell, etc. But I've never had a client say "You know Daniel, we really like your work, but gosh, those shoes are just not doing it for us". That kind of thinking is just grasping at straws. It never works that way. Look at it this way: a couple of years ago I sent a business plan into a local VC group for their paid-evaluation service (pretty good deal for them, huh?). This time, for my $200, I got back a bunch of comments. What did they tell me? That the reviewers were idiots, that's what. And how exactly could I use this information? Except to be bitter, not at all. So not knowing when it's qualitative is a pretty good thing. As for me, I'd rather save my money and get rejected for free.
- adrianwaj 19y ago
  A great VC can say more than just 'no' but can pinpoint exactly why they said no. If it is a gut feeling then they should be able to elaborate on that gut feeling. I got comments once from judges in a startup competition and they were harsh, and offered no imaginative answers.
  - shiro 19y ago
    Ok, don't confuse the cases where giving feedback benefits both parties and where it doesn't. In most selections that draws a "pass or fail" line among applicants, giving feedback benefits neither. I explained the reason in my comment in this tree ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68895 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68895 ). I assume whether you're called back for YC interview or not is this kind. What I didn't explain is that there are other cases; where "the few stand-outs" compete and ultimately the winner is chosen. If you couldn't win because of your shortcomings (that is, you would've won if you hadn't had them), then you should know what dragged you. But you don't need to worry; in such cases, somebody will tell you the reason you couldn't win. Most likely, in such circumstances, the officials make comments on each candidates. Even if there's no official comments, sombody inside will eventually tell you that you were so close. Of course anybody who wants to improve himself needs feedback. But when you're in the first kind of selection and can't make it, those who made selection are wrong person to ask feedback.
deleted 19y ago
[deleted]
shiro 19y ago
This is not particulary related to YC or startup, but a general advice. I've been, and still occasionally am, in both sides---sometimes in a position of selecting people, and more likely, in a position being selected. And I can assert the observation PG stated somewhere in one of his essays---in almost all circumstances there are a few stand-outs, a few obvious inferiors, and large number of the rest in the middle ground. Unless you're in either extremes, whether you pass or fail largely depends on small bits of random factors. And it doesn't help whether you know which of those small factors you missed. Because in highly competitive fields, you have to get into the few stand-outs eventually. Don't take the real life tests as if they are school exams where you can earn several points here and there to cover up some minus points elsewhere. You can tell excellent work from not-so-great work, can't you? Just aim at excellent work. If you think your work is less than excellent, then that's the reason you're rejected. If you think you did an excellent work and still rejected, then they are wrong.
anaphoric 19y ago
I remember a story about a Swedish manager accepting job applications for software developers in 2003. Typically permanent job postings would get hundreds of applicants back then. In any case, this busy manager had 200 unread applications to evaluate. He had perhaps a day or two to do this in. The first thing the manager did was to grab half of the applications from the pile and remark, "you see these people. They are unlucky. And we don't want to hire unlucky people." And with this he threw these applications into the trash. A lot about success is playing the numbers game and not freaking out/wasting time over rejection. Of course that is easier said than done.

pg 19y ago

poor practice wherever it may be found Sure you want to commit to that blanket statement? Do you expect every woman in every room you walk into to stop and think about why you didn't draw her attention, and then come and tell you?

neuro 19y ago
so, are you suggesting canidates demo in spandex?
adrianwaj 19y ago
It's a generalized statement about a principle. See my remark below (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68962 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68962) about publishers/authors.
nailer 19y ago
I can't speak for adrianwaj, but here's my approach: In general, I'm not seeking sexual interest from every woman in the room. In fact, there's quite a few I'm specifically seeking to avoid. For those I am interested in, I make every effort to look good and be an engaging, interesting person. I'm fit, I dress well, I'm good looking and can engage strangers in conversation easily, and usually make them laugh. If a woman I'm interested in still isn't interested in me after I've engaged her (and provided I'm still interested in her after the conversing with her) I ask myself why. If I don't know the answer, I think it's quite reasonable to politely ask her. Conversely, though, I'm prepared to accept her reasons why. For example, she might believe that I'm rough, but even if I know this not to be the case, I know there's a reason for this perception. Or she might prefer something I'm not willing to be - eg, really big guys - I'm tall and thin and can't be bothered spending more than a few days at the gym. Fair enough, it would have never worked out. But sometimes I find out something that's really valuable, and I can take that and work on it. I have to be in a frame of mind that makes her comfortable to be honest and direct. Unfortunately, there's probably a lot of guys who don't realize there's a reason behind her perception, or who would argue about why they're they the right guy. These guys make it hard for girls to be honest for those of us who are interested in the basis for a perception, rather using it as a pretext to continuing to attempt to be accepted. These also have no idea how many other great looking, witty girls there are, and put too much value on one opinion. Everything above is applicable to YCombinator.

DanielBMarkham 19y ago

Not trying to pile on, but I'm curious to what sort of feedback "nothing in there really caught our eye" would engender. A request for YC to look more closely? I mean, at some point these are qualitative measurements. Even if you had absolute knowledge, it wouldn't make things any better. Did the reviewer have a bad burrito for lunch? Is your name Bob and the reviewer unconsciously hates all people named Bob? Was there a great application just before yours, and even though yours might be acceptable, by comparison it didn't look so good? Were you the first ones evaluated (reviewers are notorious for rejecting early applicants) I exaggerate, of course, but whatever reason you get I can guarantee won't be satisfying. I mean, you can go to the store tomorrow and pick up a huge stack of books on selling, which all boil down to "Sometimes you strike out for no reason at all. Keep trying" In a vain attempt to pump readers for money, some books give you a huge list of reasons for why you can strike out. I'm a firm believer in controlling all those factors you can -- wear the power tie, turn the temperature down in the office, sit in the proper locations in an important meeting, use body language and NLP, show instead of tell, etc. But I've never had a client say "You know Daniel, we really like your work, but gosh, those shoes are just not doing it for us". That kind of thinking is just grasping at straws. It never works that way. Look at it this way: a couple of years ago I sent a business plan into a local VC group for their paid-evaluation service (pretty good deal for them, huh?). This time, for my $200, I got back a bunch of comments. What did they tell me? That the reviewers were idiots, that's what. And how exactly could I use this information? Except to be bitter, not at all. So not knowing when it's qualitative is a pretty good thing. As for me, I'd rather save my money and get rejected for free.

adrianwaj 19y ago
A great VC can say more than just 'no' but can pinpoint exactly why they said no. If it is a gut feeling then they should be able to elaborate on that gut feeling. I got comments once from judges in a startup competition and they were harsh, and offered no imaginative answers.
- shiro 19y ago
  Ok, don't confuse the cases where giving feedback benefits both parties and where it doesn't. In most selections that draws a "pass or fail" line among applicants, giving feedback benefits neither. I explained the reason in my comment in this tree ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68895 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=68895 ). I assume whether you're called back for YC interview or not is this kind. What I didn't explain is that there are other cases; where "the few stand-outs" compete and ultimately the winner is chosen. If you couldn't win because of your shortcomings (that is, you would've won if you hadn't had them), then you should know what dragged you. But you don't need to worry; in such cases, somebody will tell you the reason you couldn't win. Most likely, in such circumstances, the officials make comments on each candidates. Even if there's no official comments, sombody inside will eventually tell you that you were so close. Of course anybody who wants to improve himself needs feedback. But when you're in the first kind of selection and can't make it, those who made selection are wrong person to ask feedback.

deleted 19y ago

[deleted]

shiro 19y ago

This is not particulary related to YC or startup, but a general advice. I've been, and still occasionally am, in both sides---sometimes in a position of selecting people, and more likely, in a position being selected. And I can assert the observation PG stated somewhere in one of his essays---in almost all circumstances there are a few stand-outs, a few obvious inferiors, and large number of the rest in the middle ground. Unless you're in either extremes, whether you pass or fail largely depends on small bits of random factors. And it doesn't help whether you know which of those small factors you missed. Because in highly competitive fields, you have to get into the few stand-outs eventually. Don't take the real life tests as if they are school exams where you can earn several points here and there to cover up some minus points elsewhere. You can tell excellent work from not-so-great work, can't you? Just aim at excellent work. If you think your work is less than excellent, then that's the reason you're rejected. If you think you did an excellent work and still rejected, then they are wrong.

anaphoric 19y ago

I remember a story about a Swedish manager accepting job applications for software developers in 2003. Typically permanent job postings would get hundreds of applicants back then. In any case, this busy manager had 200 unread applications to evaluate. He had perhaps a day or two to do this in. The first thing the manager did was to grab half of the applications from the pile and remark, "you see these people. They are unlucky. And we don't want to hire unlucky people." And with this he threw these applications into the trash. A lot about success is playing the numbers game and not freaking out/wasting time over rejection. Of course that is easier said than done.