An explanation would definitely be prudent - if only to prevent people from jumping to, perhaps incorrect, conclusions in the absence of all the facts. EDIT: I

An explanation would definitely be prudent - if only to prevent people from jumping to, perhaps incorrect, conclusions in the absence of all the facts. EDIT: I see from other responses that PG addressed the issue in the original submission. The response feels like an inappropriate copout. The submission did not "conceal" anything. Furthermore - if the submission had been exactly the same but in reference to dealings with a company not funded by YC it would have stood as a useful source of advice to the OP. This relying on ToS puts my back up hugely.