4 ms·

It's fine if you don't want to tell people since there are legitimate reasons not to. But this is mostly a cop out. We know that YC application reviewers make

It's fine if you don't want to tell people since there are legitimate reasons not to. But this is mostly a cop out. We know that YC application reviewers make notes and obviously do some sort of internal ranking. There may be cases where better startups just push slightly "worse" ones down, but there's obviously some startups that are passed over for specific reasons that YC knows about. I guarantee most of these reasons/notes would be very useful for an early startup. Too bad they'll never know.

fblp 12y ago
Here's a free idea for a future YC application: "We've made the easiest way for reviewers of web submitted applicants to write notes on those applications and share them with their colleagues and applicants. Our customers include the most exclusive universities, accelerators and employers who were once mysterious and opaque about their consuming application processes. They've found that once they start using our service their applicants, team and other stakeholders learn more and make better decisions faster. They get more high quality applications as both parties get more value out of the application process."
bo1024 12y ago
I think the issue of feedback is a bit different from that of reasons why a group isn't selected. What YC seems to be saying here is more like, even if the group had done everything "right" for their project, that project/idea just doesn't seem to have the potential of another group's. (In the opinion YC). So you could ask for feedback separately from asking why you weren't selected. The potential issue there is that groups will still interpret it that way and say things like "YC said they rejected us because of this, but that's a ridiculous reason to reject...."
avenger123 12y ago
If YC states a specific reason, then what? Does YC now have the responsibility to engage in a dialogue outlining the details for the reason. It wouldn't be fair to write a single paragraph and say, "oh, we think your team dynamics suck, so we are rejecting you." What does that mean? Team dynamics compared to what? Do you write a more detailed response? Multiply that response by the number of rejections and all of a sudden you are left with a lot of new work that needs to get done. The reasons for rejection may make real sense for the reviewers but may have layers of context that can't easily be dictated in a simple email. I'm sure this is some of the thinking that is involved with why it's easier to not give specific reasons. If a team takes the YC rejection as confirmation that their startup isn't going to go anywhere then they never believed in the startup.
ChrisNorstrom 12y ago
It's like Dating. You're looking for the right person, not for the wrong person with the right answers. If you reveal too much of "why a team didn't get chosen" they can use that info to game the system. If you give away everything you're looking for in a partner on your dating profile you're going to get a lot of creepers attempting to match themselves up to you. YC already gave away too much info with the video interviews they've done in the past.
soup10 12y ago
I don't think proper for YC to release there notes. For one, as soon as you release notes, it opens you up to all sorts of criticism and public outing of frustrations by people that didn't make the cut. Same reason you don't get notes from job interviews, college applications, when you get laid off... Second, while the notes may be helpful. It's not like a little bit of magic YC advice is suddenly going to make you a successful entrepreneur. Not anymore than the thousands of other bits of advice that people publish and founders get. The vast majority of successful startups do not go through YC, and most YC companies fail anyway(albeit they often fail more gracefully as aquihires). People that actually care if they get in need to take a step back and make sure they are founding a company for reasons other than validation.
_pmf_ 12y ago
Telling people why they are rejected does not serve the interviewers and creates unnecessary risk for them (see sexism debates). Preventing these risks is understandably more important than giving applicants feedback.
nemesist 12y ago
I haven't even applied to YC and find this article insulting to the applicants. Sort of like telling a losing team in a sports match that there is nothing wrong with them and just that the winning team was slightly better. Well how does that help them at all and obviously everyone has room to improve. I usually enjoy articles from YC but personality type As who apply to YC don't care for sugarcoating...

fblp 12y ago

Here's a free idea for a future YC application: "We've made the easiest way for reviewers of web submitted applicants to write notes on those applications and share them with their colleagues and applicants. Our customers include the most exclusive universities, accelerators and employers who were once mysterious and opaque about their consuming application processes. They've found that once they start using our service their applicants, team and other stakeholders learn more and make better decisions faster. They get more high quality applications as both parties get more value out of the application process."

bo1024 12y ago

I think the issue of feedback is a bit different from that of reasons why a group isn't selected. What YC seems to be saying here is more like, even if the group had done everything "right" for their project, that project/idea just doesn't seem to have the potential of another group's. (In the opinion YC). So you could ask for feedback separately from asking why you weren't selected. The potential issue there is that groups will still interpret it that way and say things like "YC said they rejected us because of this, but that's a ridiculous reason to reject...."

avenger123 12y ago

If YC states a specific reason, then what? Does YC now have the responsibility to engage in a dialogue outlining the details for the reason. It wouldn't be fair to write a single paragraph and say, "oh, we think your team dynamics suck, so we are rejecting you." What does that mean? Team dynamics compared to what? Do you write a more detailed response? Multiply that response by the number of rejections and all of a sudden you are left with a lot of new work that needs to get done. The reasons for rejection may make real sense for the reviewers but may have layers of context that can't easily be dictated in a simple email. I'm sure this is some of the thinking that is involved with why it's easier to not give specific reasons. If a team takes the YC rejection as confirmation that their startup isn't going to go anywhere then they never believed in the startup.

ChrisNorstrom 12y ago

It's like Dating. You're looking for the right person, not for the wrong person with the right answers. If you reveal too much of "why a team didn't get chosen" they can use that info to game the system. If you give away everything you're looking for in a partner on your dating profile you're going to get a lot of creepers attempting to match themselves up to you. YC already gave away too much info with the video interviews they've done in the past.

soup10 12y ago

I don't think proper for YC to release there notes. For one, as soon as you release notes, it opens you up to all sorts of criticism and public outing of frustrations by people that didn't make the cut. Same reason you don't get notes from job interviews, college applications, when you get laid off... Second, while the notes may be helpful. It's not like a little bit of magic YC advice is suddenly going to make you a successful entrepreneur. Not anymore than the thousands of other bits of advice that people publish and founders get. The vast majority of successful startups do not go through YC, and most YC companies fail anyway(albeit they often fail more gracefully as aquihires). People that actually care if they get in need to take a step back and make sure they are founding a company for reasons other than validation.

_pmf_ 12y ago

Telling people why they are rejected does not serve the interviewers and creates unnecessary risk for them (see sexism debates). Preventing these risks is understandably more important than giving applicants feedback.

nemesist 12y ago

I haven't even applied to YC and find this article insulting to the applicants. Sort of like telling a losing team in a sports match that there is nothing wrong with them and just that the winning team was slightly better. Well how does that help them at all and obviously everyone has room to improve. I usually enjoy articles from YC but personality type As who apply to YC don't care for sugarcoating...