

Ycombinator-x: self organizing 3 months bootcamps/feeder - cwjacklin

of the 97% percent that don't get accepted into ycombinator, most if not all can benefit from similar types of events such as weekly dinners/mini demos, prototype day and demo day outlined here http://ycombinator.com/atyc.html<p>Granted, without the framework and experience of the people, network &#38; alumni at ycombinator, ycombinator-x does not equate ycombinator, but perhaps former can be a feeder into the latter.<p>To make ycombinator-x happen wherever there are startups, I envision this.<p>Each ycombinator-x will have 10 companies.  10 because it's small enough to find space for everyone to attend weekly dinner.<p>advertise: here/meetup/incubator/cowork space/wherever online
find: space/speakers for weekly dinners.
find: mentors/investors<p>feedback welcomed, especially on how to self-organize.  If 100 startups submitted to ycombinator-x, what is a good heuristic to organize them into 10 groups?
======
frankus
I think there's tremendous potential for this idea.

I often find myself wishing I had the hacker equivalent of a gym buddy:
basically someone who keeps me motivated to keep working on something and
makes me feel like a bit of a loser when I stop or slack off, and for whom I
do the same.

At the risk of hijacking your idea, I think the 97% of startups that don't get
accepted to YC are the tip of the iceberg. There must also tons of talented
people who don't even think to apply to YC because their project isn't the
sort of thing YC funds, or isn't far enough along to seek funding, or they
just aren't in a position to drop everything, quit their day job, and move to
Silicon Valley.

And I don't think you need to limit it strictly to "companies who are seeking
funding" the way that YC does, since you're not (I assume) sitting on a pile
of cash that needs investing. You could really accept any person or small
group that is working on an interesting project. Or you could just dispense
with the pretense of "applying for" and "accepting" people and just make it
open to whoever wants to show up and share their project.

A weekly checkin in the form of a dinner and mini demo is perfect. It's enough
time to get something important done (even within the confines of a day job),
but frequent enough to enforce regular progress and at the same time make it
not such a huge deal if you have to miss a week.

I think the key to self-organizing is to think less like an organism and more
like a species: if you want the concept to succeed you need to be OK with any
particular implementation of it failing.

So just start a group in one or a handful of geographic areas. If it's
successful, it will generate official and unofficial copies in other areas.
Some of the copies will work better than the original and hopefully overtake
them. I don't think there's any need to enforce a minimum or maximum size.
Groups that are too small will die out and those that are too large will
likely fork.

You could look to groups like Appsterdam, Pecha-Kucha, the Homebrew Computer
Club, Beer && Code, etc. for inspiration.

And rather than something as formal as YCombinator, I would start with
something like a weekly "Hacker Dinner" where people show up, eat, socialize,
and show off what they're working on. Prototype days (or weekends) and demo
days could come later.

~~~
cwjacklin
yes, i believe environment is a factor in how much things get done. simply
having to show something weekly to your peers is an easy way to accomplish
that.

i imagine something a little bit more structured, but not as formal as
ycombinator, with the same group of startups coming each week. there exists
other groups for regular gathering to talk code, eat, socialize, demo.

Thanks for the feedback and suggestions.

------
mchannon
Available heuristic concepts include random distribution, tiering (top 50, top
60, top 70, etc.), geographic (San Jose, Peninsula, Southern East Bay, etc.),
age groups, and self-selection (think of it as picking teams as in grade
school).

Picking 10 teampickers at random and letting them draft their team in rounds
would allow for similar benefits to a college or pro sports draft: try to make
up for shortcomings in the existing line-up (team with good design skills,
team with good business savvy) would probably end up working out.

Allowing for a midseason merger between these groups would probably also be
productive, as there will probably tend to be people who don't stay with the
program, and thus groups of 10 will become groups of 5-8.

The end best answer may be all of these approaches, with each approach taken
over a span of every two weeks.

~~~
cwjacklin
agreed w/ the downsizing from 10 on down due to dropouts.

if you are working on a startup and not already in an incubator, would you
join?

~~~
mchannon
(getting a premonition YC decisionmakers will read this and weigh accordingly)

The thing that would keep me from joining (assuming my group didn't make the
YC cut), like many other applicants to YC, is that I have a geographical
disadvantage, and the modest stipend ends up making the relocation (and the
dinners) possible.

A YCx would likely not provide that stipend, so colocating a group of founders
for a dinner (and especially multiple dinners) would get prohibitively
expensive outside of certain geographic locations where enough teams live (I
can see a YCx in Boston, or LA, or Austin working out).

There's still probably 10 bay area rejected applicants per acceptee, so this
is still a very worthwhile project.

~~~
cwjacklin
well there's not investment involved, nor equity taken. It's for the benefits
of all involved. Instead of working in silos or at coworking spaces, YCx will
provide a framework to develop more meaningful relationships than going to
casual meetups or general assembly (NYC) events because you get to see the
same 10 (or however many) startups repeatedly over a period of time, and
presumably grow together.

I am based in NYC, so I can see that happening here. I am not sure where you
are based but if your city has at least 50k to 100k people, you can probably
get a few startups together.

And on dinner. Aren't we supposed to be just trying to get to ramen profitable
? :)

