
Y Combinator Cuts Ties with Peter Thiel After Ending Part-Time Partner Program - minimaxir
https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanmac/y-combinator-cuts-ties-with-peter-thiel-ends-part-time
======
tptacek
Can we save ourselves a really long, pointless political argument?

They ended the entire part-time-partner program, and transitioned some of the
part-timers to advisor roles. Thiel is one of multiple part-timers not to
become an advisor.

You are not going to get an answer, or more "context", from YC about the
political implications of this change. No matter how many times you ask and
how carefully you word the questions, you're not going to pry loose any first-
hand drama from this situation.

I'm happy Thiel's no longer involved with YC. I'm disappointed that it took
this long, but we can't always get what we want. There are people here that
disagree with me on both those things. We all knew that about each other. We
probably don't need to beat it to death.

~~~
kenneth
How can you say "can we save ourselves a really long, pointless political
argument" and end your post with a divisive political opinion (that you think
people with opposing viewpoints should be silenced)? You're literally inviting
the debate that you're calling long and pointless. Or perhaps you just want to
only share your opinion without others having the same opportunity, so you can
have the last word?

Personally, I think Trump is reprehensible. I also think that silencing people
with opposing political viewpoints is dangerous and reprehensible. I don't
always agree with Peter Thiel politically, but I would happily do business
with him. It's really not our place as the internet lynch-mob to interfere
with Peter's role in the startup community because of his political views.
Note, @sama said as much when the whole thing went down.

~~~
dragonwriter
> How can you say "can we save ourselves a really long, pointless political
> argument" and end your post with a divisive political opinion

Probably because the “divisive” opinion is on a different question than the on
tptacek sees as pointless, which he was pretty express about: the pointless
argument is about the political _meaning_ of Thiel not being a partner. And
he's right, that's not going to get an answer and any argument about it is
pointless.

The “divisive” opinion about whether or not it's a good thing that that
relationship ended is, at a minimum, not pointless in the same way (it's
likely to be fruitless in the way that arguments that rest in clashes of
fundamental values are, but that's a different concern.)

> It's really not our place as the internet lynch-mob to interfere with
> Peter's role in the startup community because of his political views.

You are free to choose to restrain the means in which you apply your free
speech and association rights based on this narrow, misguided, elitist view of
the role of the _hoi polloi_ , of course.

> Note, @sama said as much when the whole thing went down.

I'm entirely unsurprised that Altman would say no external party of should
question YC decisions on political (or, heck, any other) grounds, but I'm not
sure why you think noting that he did so adds any weight to your argument.

~~~
tradersam
I was agreeing with the begining of your post, but

> You are free to choose to restrain the means in which you apply your free
> speech and association rights based on this narrow, misguided, elitist view
> of the role of the hoi polloi, of course.

Is where I burst out laughing and moved on.

------
evangelista
I am still really puzzled over exactly why Peter Thiel so so hated. I believe
the level of hatred is completely unwarranted. From my understanding, it boils
down to this:

\- He is remotely associated with Trump \- He helped take down Gawker \-
....something something something...but he backed Trump!

For the Gawker part:

Gawker outed him without his permission.

Outing a gay man is something the tabloids used to do in the darkest time
period of the United States. Finding someone was gay and making that known
publicly was a tool used by very, very unpleasant people to destroy careers
and lives for years.

Given how Liberal the tech industry is, it is genuinely puzzling that people
would rise to the defense of "Freedom of the Press" to use someone's sexual
identity to try to discredit or embarrass them and destroy their career.

This is not freedom of the press, its bullying. If a media outlet did
something to you personally and you had a few million dollars to spare to shut
them down, you would do it too. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from
consequences.

So Peter Thiel helped shut down an abusive tabloid that outs gay men against
their will and regresses the tech sector back to the 1970's and 80's. That
doesn't seem sufficient to warrant the hatred.

Then he was associated with Trump. He dared so say things like: "Our middle
class has been gutted by globalization and we are being eaten alive by China."

Bernie Sanders ran on this exact platform. Almost word-for-word, Bernie
Sander's political platform economically had many things in common with what
Thiel was promoting.

So that leaves one final option: The reason that people hate Thiel is because
he made enemies in the Liberal press, they smeared him relentlessly and people
internalized this without doing their own independent thinking or research.

I don't like that Y Combinator was expected to "Apologize" for not firing
someone for holding political beliefs that align them with 42% of the United
States population. I feel the tech industry is now a worse, less free place
when demonization of this type has become so endemic.

~~~
jedberg
Theil didn't just hurt a bully. He took it a step further. For one, he
financed someone _else 's_ lawsuit, because his own was unwinnable (they did
in fact print the truth, that he is gay). More importantly, he hurt free
speech through the chilling effect of his suit.

What he basically did was say, "don't ever print anything negative about a
billionaire because they can take down your entire business". So now if a
billionaire really does do something newsworthy and negative, places like the
New York Times might think twice about publishing that story, for fear of the
cost of defending a billionaire's lawsuit.

That's why people dislike him (other than his Trump support, although to be
fair I haven't heard anything about him supporting Trump anymore).

~~~
JonFish85
"What he basically did was say, "don't ever print anything negative about a
billionaire because they can take down your entire business""

No, he didn't. Gawker died on its own merits; in an alternative world where
Gawker continued to flaunt the law because someone couldn't afford to fund a
lawsuit, I'm OK with this outcome. Not to mention, Gawker did themselves
absolutely no favors, from ignoring a federal judge to flippantly answering
questions under oath, they garnered no pity from me.

~~~
jedberg
I agree, Gawker was awful and deserved to die for many reasons.

But it's important to remember that the judgement was only the death blow --
defending the lawsuit was what gave them a slow death. Even if Gawker was
right and won, they still would have died.

------
owens99
This post does not appear to contain any evidence that YC has cut ties with
Peter Thiel. They ended the program that he, and many other individuals, were
a part of. Just because he is not in this program anymore, does not mean they
no longer have any ties to him. There is also no evidence of any connection
here to Trump or Thiel's support of him with the ending of the program or
Thiel's lack of involvement in a different official capacity with YC. I wish I
could have the five minutes back it took to read this click bait.

~~~
racer-v
The page literally says: _Edit: Peter Thiel is no longer affiliated with Y
Combinator._

That means they at least cut _some_ ties.

[https://blog.ycombinator.com/welcome-
peter/](https://blog.ycombinator.com/welcome-peter/)

~~~
owens99
Not necessarily.

~~~
racer-v
You don't believe that an affiliation counts as a tie? Or you think YC is
lying that Thiel is no longer affiliated?

------
craigkerstiens
While I know most of these things never get a truly transparent answer, and
often for valid reasons. I am very curious for some response from YC.

It may have been politically motivated, and it may not have been. I'm also not
aware how much Thiel was involved vs. other partners. Additional insight into
much of this could shed good light to those that appreciate much of what YC
has done and aims to continue to do.

Some response from YC would be a big win, but also just may not be an option.

------
johnrichardson
I'm a big fan of Peter Thiel, and of anyone who's a divergent thinker and has
well thought out opinions that run contrary to mainstream ideology (e.g., Noam
Chomsky).

If YC ended its relationship with Peter because of his political affiliations,
I'd find that extremely unfortunate. Any institution which closes itself off
to outside information, challenging viewpoints and diversity of thought risks
becoming an ideological echo chamber and ultimately weakening itself in the
long run.

~~~
ubernostrum
_Any institution which closes itself off to outside information, challenging
viewpoints and diversity of thought_

Do you make sure to attend flat-earth meetings?

------
xupybd
>YC is not going to fire someone for supporting a major party nominee.

This is awesome. I had no idea this had been said. I have a lot of respect for
anyone bringing that sentiment.

------
sillysaurus3
Can anyone provide context to this? Sam has been on record saying that he
wouldn't cut Thiel solely for political affiliations. Was there another
reason?

~~~
s73ver_
They didn't feel he was a good fit, or maybe Thiel didn't want to transition
to whatever they replaced the partner program with. Simple as that.

------
jacquesm
What about Milner?

------
LeoJiWoo
Rumors are swirling that Thiel is gearing up for economic/regulatory war on
silicon valley.

So I can't say this is surprising but I find it all extremely confusing.

EDIT: Mostly rumors I hear from happy hours with some politicos in DC. Sorry,
its just meat space rumors.

~~~
pault
What would he have to gain from such a war?

~~~
randyrand
A few large silicon valley companies have a large concentration of power.
Libertarians like distribution of power among smaller entities.

~~~
s73ver_
But that's not Thiel at all. He does want power concentrated; he just wants to
be one of those it's concentrated with.

~~~
alexanderstears
He wants power to be as concentrated as it should be when people are free to
gain and lose power as consequences of their decisions. That's contrasted with
bureaucratic insulation whereby power isn't gained or lost with bad or good
decisions.

~~~
s73ver_
Nothing I've seen indicates that's even remotely close to the truth. He wants
power to be concentrated with him.

~~~
alexanderstears
Then why did he support another person's presidential run?

And why is it a problem for him to concentrate power so long as the power
transfer is consensual? or democratic?

~~~
dredmorbius
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen)

------
neo4sure
In my opinion, this was long overdue. Anyway, Ycombinator maybe strategically
getting ready for a world without trump. Having people who supported this type
of a Person won't be a good look in the future.

~~~
ssijak
Sure, lets all think the same. Do you play football with people who dont like
to eat what you like?

~~~
zimpenfish
> Do you play football with people who dont like to eat what you like?

I appreciate that trivialising the issues to score cheap slippery slope points
is de rigueur these days but you must surely see the yawning dichotomy between
"people who don't like to eat what you like" and "people who believe other
people are lesser beings less deserving of rights, money, health, protections"

~~~
ssijak
Peter does not think that

