The way I see it, Paul was willing to take a huge gamble on this company from the outset because of a strong gut feeling. Y Combinator didn't have to let them in and was being incredibly generous, going as far as setting aside their own rules for this one special case. They went above and beyond the call of duty. And then, to hear word that they'd have to yet again do things differently than they are accustomed to for this one company probably just didn't feel right anymore. I am happy for the writer and I bet he'll be very successful, but where he went wrong (if my facts are correct) is expecting YC to allow him to stay in the program because of "protocol." They made the first decision based on a gut reaction, and they reserved the right to make a second decision "on gut" as well. Also, to be clear, they didn't kick him out, they respectfully asked the founder to apply again next quarter. My purpose isn't to declare a winner. I have a lot of respect for the author and his perseverance. But I hope he sees just how much he was asking from YC, what an incredible achievement that was to convince Paul to take the first leap of faith, and why he probably should have just swallowed his pride and accepted YC's decision with genuine gratitude.
Sorry, I'm nerdy but I guess not nerdy enough to be in on the joke. Could someone explain it to me? I'm "the business guy" in my startup, though I'm actually a girl.
This is indeed great news, but I can't believe what CN has done to this company. Well, I actually can because I worked at CN for 4 years and saw extremely little investment in long-term digital strategy. There were a lot of tricks being thought of to try to get an edge, but they still have too many print dinosaurs who are terrified of losing their jobs calling the shots. And I'm not saying these print dinosaurs couldn't very easily evolve and learn what they need to learn and be what the publisher needs to stay afloat. I'm saying there's this cloud of fear looming over everyone's heads there that's suffocating any potential for innovation.
100% on board with this comment. A dose of humility is something lacking at the top of a lot of companies who wonder why they can't seem to hold onto their talent. Give your employees the feeling that you're counting on them, and your problem will soon be, "Man, I've got so many overachievers."
That's great to hear. A company that is so confident in what its doing and its hires, that it trusts and encourages them to expand their skill set and degree of influence.
I thought this article was going to be about the controversial theory of crowdsourcing in the wider sense--not just design. With these deceiving headlines, you attract a lot of people like me who rain on your parade and unfortunately, think your article is a snooze.
Are you talking about the fact that it's CHARGING people to VALIDATE your idea? I get what they're trying to do, and I was actually on board for the first three points. But then I got to #4, and it was like slamming into a wall. So you're going to celebrate your launch by grubbing money from the people who helped you get there? Surely, there must be a better way. I say, keep thinking...
If I got it right, then point #4 is that they actually only get charged when there is a product to deliver, i.e. they get the product and you get the money.
I'm creating a product that hopefully fills this void. A casual, non-committal way to show someone you'd like to get to know them better--without all the noise. I'm also a girl, so my main concern is building something that doesn't veer into creep-ville. I'll keep you posted.
"The current popularity of facebook is also inherently causing a lot of people to stop sharing their personal lives on facebook."
This is troubling to me. I feel like I'm looking at a bunch of ghosts when I view people's profiles now. Anyone else? Their photos and a bit of their bios are still up, but they've mostly moved on to other forms of tech to post anything dynamic because of the logical fear that they will no longer control what aspects of their personal lives will become public record. What, I wonder, is the company doing about this issue beyond just pr stuff like funding privacy-related nonprofits? If they don't address it in their core functionality, they've got a potential wasteland on their hands.
