
Be yourself. Abnormal people create abnormal returns. - jaf12duke
http://42floors.com/blog/posts/be-yourself-abnormal-people-create-abnormal-returns
======
oskarth
The article seems to imply that what you wear is part of your identity (don't
wear a suit, be yourself). How about decoupling your clothes from your
identity? There is nothing intrinsically wrong with wanting to "dress to
impress". People who think that seem to me to want to make a point of how they
are _so not into fashion_ \- which ironically is a form of fashion itself (see
punkers).

Be yourself. Dress up if you want to and it seems to fit the occasion. Don't
feel pressured into wearing something that you don't feel comfortable in.
Don't confuse inner qualities with superficial looks - but don't ignore the
fact that first impressions matter.

Of course it could be a good anti-signal to show that you don't care about how
you present yourself, but that doesn't mean you should go to investors in a
bathrobe because someone told you to.

~~~
andrewflnr
_How about decoupling your clothes from your identity?_

Maybe, but you can only take that so far. I think the thing to keep in mind is
that clothes are communication, almost as much as what you say. The MBA, the
punker, and the hacker all have their messages they send with their clothes.
You can't avoid communicating, if for no other reason than that people will
draw their own message from what you choose to wear. May as well make it
count.

You can decouple what you say from your identity, but that can be fake too,
sometimes.

~~~
mtrimpe
My ex-partner was in fashion and the one thing he taught me most of all is
that clothes are just that: "communication."

That's also why I don't feel bad wearing a suit for investors, because I
consciously choose to communicate that I'm dressing up for my surroundings.

I don't try to walk like I wear a suit everyday and I don't try to walk and
talk like a big-shot businessman. I walk like I'm a geek who's wearing a suit
to dress up.

There's very little fake about that.

What's fake is people who wear a suit (trying) to trick people into thinking
they're established businessmen _and_ people who dress down as 'counter-
signalling' to appear to be confident hacker founders.

TL;DR; Fashion is about communication. Communicating a congruent message is
'real'. Trying to 'signal' with your communication is fake.

------
gruseom
Every comment in this thread right now is casting doubt on Jason's point that
you shouldn't be fake to seem more businesslike for investors. Wow. That's a
bad sign.

Jason's talking about good investors and he's right. Take YC - if you're
talking to the YCers about your startup it's just absurd to place importance
on "businesslike" apparel or indeed anything other than your startup. No doubt
there are a few genuine exceptions (Tesla liked to work in formal dress) but
for the majority of us that comes as a relief.

I thought what Jason's saying was a truism by now. Valley culture may not have
permeated everywhere in tech but it's far more widespread than it used to be -
widespread enough that the point about dress is probably a good litmus test in
most parts of the US and Canada. And any place it isn't true, that's a
problem. The Valley culture of being informal and focusing on the work evolved
for good reason.

~~~
ValG
I don't think anyone is saying to be fake, but the same way you wouldn't show
up to a wedding in ripped jeans and a t-shirt, you shouldn't show up to an
investor pitch in those clothes either. Just cause you're wearing a suit to a
wedding doesn't mean you're trying to be fake, it just means you understand
the conventions surrounding the event; the conventions surrounding a pitch is
similar. I wonder, at the YCom demo day, what do the presenting YCers wear?

~~~
mhartl
I agree about the wedding, and disagree about the investor pitch.
Underdressing for a wedding might be perceived as an insult. Likewise with an
investor meeting, but the risk is much lower since it's not principally a
social occasion. Moreover, dressing like a hacker has an upside: they'll know
you're a hacker. Finally, underdressing is a status hack known as counter-
signaling: if you're confident enough to show up to an investor pitch in jeans
and a T shirt, you must be a badass. Jobs wore mock turtlenecks and jeans with
holes in them; Zuck wears fleeces and shitty sandals.

~~~
billpatrianakos
You both have a point but this counter-signaling thing is a fad. When everyone
is doing it the value just plummets. The whole casual dress for pitching thing
is so common now that I predict it's not long at all before the guys dressing
nicely are taken more seriously again.

Also, what does "dressing like a hacker" mean? Hackers exist outside the
valley too and there's no uniform that I was issued. Maybe theyre on back
order for the Chicago metro area? But in all seriousness, if you said "he
doesn't dress like a doctor" it makes far more sense than "he doesn't dress
like a hacker". I'm a hacker but I'm also a business owner. So what attire do
I don? Hoodie and flip flops or open sport jacket and collared shirt sans tie?
I feel that in this case many aspects of hacker culture are just fads and the
old standards (like dressing well for pitches and interviews) will never go
out of style.

~~~
ScottBurson
Ah, you're in Chicago.

I think you'd find it's different in Silicon Valley.

Which is not to suggest in the slightest that you'd be out of place in an open
sport jacket and collared shirt sans tie. But if you prefer a hoodie and flip-
flops, I think you'd find you could indulge that preference more freely here.

------
vectorpush
April fools! The trick is that people judge you by how you choose to make
yourself appear and dressing a certain way doesn't make you any less
authentic.

I'll also add that as a member of a certain minority community, I've been
criticized by peers for not sporting an "authentic" style, despite the fact
that 98% of potential employers would likely send me packing were I to show up
to an interview in said style. You don't know how someone will interpret your
appearance, so unless you really know your audience, the smart money says
"look good for investors" (or employers etc)

~~~
furyofantares
Appearances do matter a lot which is why I would never dress up for a
technical interview.

~~~
ams6110
Would I wear a tailored executive suit to a technical interview? No. But if
I'm interviewing technical candidates, all else being equal, I'm going to
favor the nicely dressed one who has attended to personal hygiene that day,
vs. one that I would have trouble distinguishing from a panhandler.

Dressing up to an appropriate level shows you care.

~~~
gruseom
And thus you would overlook Woz and demonstrate incompetency. Not that I
accept for a second that someone like Woz deserves patronizing language like
"attended to personal hygiene that day" or "panhandler" - but people who base
their evaluation of technical talent on social conformity certainly do see
them that way.

The thing about the good investors the OP is talking about is that,
increasingly, they don't do this. There are two reasons why they don't. One
(which applies to only some, like YC) is that they are technical people
themselves. The other is that the ones who do it lose to the ones who don't.

That is the historical trend and it has little to with fads or fashions. It
has to do with economic power shifting towards people who create things.

~~~
FreakLegion
Because Woz would never[1], ever[2], ever[3] dress for the occasion. Ever[4].

1\. [http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tuaw.com/media/2011/04/woz-
return...](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tuaw.com/media/2011/04/woz-return-to-
apple.jpg)

2\. <http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpmlgqzYtY1qafiav.jpg>

3\. <http://www.pcbdesign007.com/articlefiles/77213-max%20woz.jpg>

4\. [http://cdn02.cdnwp.celebuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy-
im...](http://cdn02.cdnwp.celebuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy-
imgx/3/2/6/1/1/5/1/large-3261151.jpg?v=1237825835)

~~~
gruseom
All your evidence is decades too late, but you have a point. Woz would have
worn a suit to a job interview or investor meeting. But the 1970s were a long
time ago. It's no longer to be taken for granted.

------
nazgulnarsil
You don't get to say you aren't playing the signalling game. This is just
interpreted as either a high status move (if you're already high status) or an
admission of defeat if you are low status.

Doing nothing is always still a move.
<http://lesswrong.com/lw/bam/doing_nothing/>

The general rule of thumb is try to dress 1 step above the average level in
whatever setting, but no higher.

~~~
gruseom
I can't imagine anything more tedious than to spend my life thinking this way.

~~~
sliverstorm
You can't approach every minute of life thinking about signaling theory, but
it often helps understand the root mechanisms when they are otherwise murky.

Much like calculus, really.

~~~
gruseom
There's something called "signaling theory" that has uncovered the "root
mechanisms" of human relations and is comparable to calculus? That sounds like
an absurd fantasy. I'll have to look it up.

~~~
sunahsuh
Think of it as a heuristic tool to analyze and evaluate human behavior when
you need it. And if you find it useful, try learning the basics of a few other
frameworks and/or theories too: social capital (and social network analysis in
general), labeling theory, diffusion of innovation, etc. In particular,
technologists (and particularly entrepreneurs) that don't have some sort of
exposure to sociotechnical research are missing out on a tremendous resource,
imo.

~~~
gruseom
Care to recommend one or two of the best sources?

~~~
nazgulnarsil
"Impro: Improvisation and the theatre"

disregard the seeming lack of relevance.

~~~
gruseom
That's quite funny. I love that book! (The first half, at least.) Keith
Johnstone lives in my town and I've occasionally crossed paths with him at the
local grocery. Anyway, sure, his chapter on status games is brilliant. But not
as a guide to living. There are much better guides to living in there than
that :)

------
hvass
According to Wikipedia: "The halo effect is a cognitive bias that involves one
trait influencing others in one's judgement of another person or object. First
noted by Edward Thorndike in the 1920s, the halo effect has since been applied
to a variety of other fields".

This is a primary reason why you should really, really care how you look. I am
not saying that it involves wearing a suit 24/7, but even if you are a hacker-
type, in real life, those things matter.

~~~
nazgulnarsil
Television has exacerbated this phenomenon. The good looking people do all the
interesting things.

------
jasonmcalacanis
Walked into a meeting with VCs last week with my standard outfit: very
expensive shoes, cheap $40 jeans, crisp but simple Brooks Brothers shirt and a
decent (but not outrageous) designer blazer. This is my dressed down... no
tie, no suit. I feel comfortable like that.

Not too dressy but not a mess.

One walks in wearing a tshirt, jeans and sneakers. I'm like WTF?!

Second one walks in with the same. Double WTF?!

Five years ago you would NEVER see a Sand Hill Road VC wearing a tshirt and
sneakers. Never.

It's the Zuck effect IMO. :-)

~~~
mcguire
You can't be a rebel unless you wear the right uniform.

~~~
unimpressive
Ah, but you see; the "right uniform" changes over time. In an age where
everyone tries to be a rebel; wearing a suit becomes rebellion.

A uniform is by definition anti-individuality.

------
duncanj
I remember that Buckminster Fuller said he started out dressing in a shirt
without a tie and nobody took his message urgently. So he started dressing
like a banker. That was a long time ago, but perhaps the lesson remains.

------
jasonmcalacanis
... and nothing matters today except a hockey stick curve.

If you showed up in a thong and pink cutoff shirt and barefoot with a
pinterest-like curve any VC would run over their grandmother in the parking
lot to fund.

VCs only care about one thing: returns.

------
karamazov
Between recording videos and meeting with a more people than I'm used to, I'm
now paying more attention to what I wear. I tend to dress formally when
meeting people in a formal setting - I find that it impacts my mindset in a
positive way. Interacting with people, tooling, and relaxing in the same
clothing is like working in your bedroom; it blurs boundaries between
different contexts. By dressing for the occasion, I can delineate my behavior
appropriately.

That being said, I wouldn't go to a meeting in something uncomfortable; a suit
to talk to investors feels like overkill.

------
mgkimsal
"Investors are not looking for someone that looks like them. They may wear
suits. That doesn't mean you should. Investors are interested in getting to
know the real you. If you’re a little strange, that’s okay. They like strange.
They like people who do things that normal people aren’t capable of, and they
know that that capability often correlates with eccentric people. The last
thing you want to do is wash away your own personality in some doldrums of
blue and khaki."

They also just might want someone who's not afraid to step out of their own
comfort zone for two hours. Seems to me we're getting to the point (or are
past it) where "entrepreneur" just means "guy in tennis shoes working on a web
service idea". Certainly seemed to be the vibe from that piece there. People
are _comfortable_ with 'pitching' _all the time_ \- 'pitching' their 'new
idea' to 'investors', cause when you're casual like that, anyone could be an
'investor' you can 'pitch' to.

Don't get me wrong - there's a lot of hard working people out there working on
great ideas (some of them not even involving a web api!). They're going to go
through a hell of a lot of tough times, ups and downs, and doing a hell of a
lot of stuff they've never done before.

If wearing a suit or tie or keeping your "weirdness" in check for an hour are
the things that holds your endeavour back from succeeding, you had bigger
problems all along.

------
ValG
Excellent points, but it never hurts to clean up a little bit. Remember,
people make their first impression of you within the first 30 seconds of
meeting you, in the case of a pitch, that first 30 seconds may be before you
even say anything (setting up the presentation)... What do they have to go on?
Your body language and your appearance... If they write you off as just
another hacker that doesn't understand the business aspect of a start-up,
you're not doing any favors. Maybe the answer is to have a balance of founders
(as I think most people recommend anyways). Have the technical guys clean up a
bit but still have their personalities shine, and the non-technical look
sharp. That way you can represent a balanced team; the dreamers and the
realists together.

~~~
gruseom
_If they write you off as just another hacker that doesn't understand the
business aspect of a start-up, you're not doing any favors._

Oh yes you are. You just avoided a bad investor.

~~~
ValG
How so? All you've done for yourself is create a hill you have to climb to
right from the beginning. Investors, like founders, often have tight schedules
and little time to make decisions. They have to make their decisions quickly,
because they have 100 other people clambering to meet with them on getting
their investments. You can't blame them if they write you off b/c you couldn't
take the 1/2 hour before the meeting to freshen up... Plus, in the start-up
community it may seem to be more "acceptable" to dress casually for an
important investor meeting that could change the trajectory of your company
and maybe even destroy it, (sounds ludicrous when I say it that way), but in
the public perception that is unacceptable. The goals for many companies is
the get mass appeal and adoption, and if you're going to play the part of the
founder/ceo/face of the company, you have to represent your company in a
professional manner; if you can't do that in such an important investor
meeting, what assurance does the vc/investor have that you can do it to the
public.

~~~
gruseom
Because an investor who thinks things like "just another hacker who doesn't
understand the business aspect of a start-up" is likely to interfere with how
a hacker-founder wants to run the company later.

In courtship, you should be grateful when the other person says something so
egregious you could never stand to be with them. They just spared you a lot of
trouble down the road.

Your view would make sense if founders didn't have a choice because all
investors thought the same way. That's the world we used to live in, but not
anymore.

~~~
ValG
I'm arguing that generally founders don't have a choice; Unless you have an
unbelievably good product, and know the right people, the likelihood that you
will get your start-up funded is unbelievably small. The start-up community is
relatively small, the number of people in that community who are investors is
even smaller; the pool of founders is very large. Many, if not most, founders
know very little about investors and who they can reach out to. So their
perception is that, if you need funding you take what you can get. Especially
when you hear NO after NO... Beggars can't be choosers. Is it ideal, of course
not, but it is what it is...

~~~
gruseom
Well, ok I guess, if that's the world you live in. I observe things changing
quite a bit more than that, but admittedly at different rates in different
places. You know what, though? I'd rather work on making that unbelievably
good product you mention than figure out how to make myself seem something I'm
not. Lots of people are succeeding. Not all of them take funding.

Besides, if you make something great that people want, your chance of getting
funded is not so small, because you can apply to YC, who are looking for
people just like that and have none of the prejudices you describe.

~~~
ValG
Looks like we finally found something we can agree on ;)

Making a great product that people want is the key, it's always been the key
and always will be the key.

Don't forget though, YC has gotten alot more press in recent years (e.g. this
[http://news.cnet.com/8301-33617_3-57406737-276/y-combinator-...](http://news.cnet.com/8301-33617_3-57406737-276/y-combinator-
disneyland-for-investors/)), and one might argue a little more competitive
because of it.

That might increase the quality of what's coming out of YC, but it also means,
as hard as the may try, they are always going to miss out on some potentially
good teams/ideas/products.

------
jjjjjosh
Jesse Thorn on why how you dress matters:

 _When you dress, you are making a statement; not a fashion statement, but a
statement of identity. If you put on a jacket and tie, for example, you are
signifying to others that you take the occasion seriously, whatever that
occasion may be. If someone looks at you and interprets how you dress, they
are not being superficial. They are reading the message that you wrote. [...]
Can one earn respect in other ways? Certainly, and one should. But that’s no
reason to open a conversation with someone by saying, without words, “this is
not important to me.”_

<http://putthison.com/post/665640307/why-this-matters>

~~~
danenania
Why can't the 'message' be: "I respect your intelligence enough that I won't
assume you'll judge me based on what I wear, so I'll just wear what's
comfortable for me."

~~~
jjjjjosh
I think there's a subtle but important difference between "what you wear sends
a message" and "you'll judge me based on what I wear."

You're shifting the agency away from yourself - to make a choice about what
message you're going to send (by how you're dressed) - to others, making them
out to be shallow for receiving the message you send and processing it
accordingly, no?

------
jkahn
This may be true in the valley, but in the rest of the world setting the
initial impression with how you dress goes a long way.

~~~
psycho
I guess, it's true in a tech world. Well, in fact, I know that in Russian IT-
world it's also so.

------
minikites
People pay attention to how you dress because it's the very first
communication you make, before you shake hands or say "Hello". And there is no
reason to open that conversation with the phrase "this is not important to
me".

~~~
suyash
good point, non verbal communication makes a big impact and you don't want to
risk anything specially if you're going for a pitch and asking for millions of
dollars!

------
secoif
The type of person who balks at casual dress is not the type of person who I'd
want to work for or with, and vice versa. Problem solves itself.

~~~
secoif
Casual dress shows confidence: "I don't need to bow to social norms, I'm
confident I can sell myself and my ideas, even without a suit."

------
benmmurphy
this advice works if people aren't broken. unfortunately, people are broken.

------
AustinLin
I think the point Jason, and others in this thread, are making is that great
investors understand that how a founder dresses (especially in tech) is a poor
indicator for success. Their pitch and, as YCombinator has pointed out, the
intelligence and drive are much better predictors of success. This is on top
of the fact that investors aren't looking for the status quo, they are looking
for visionaries who are going to make next great thing. Dressing nicely
because everyone else is, shows that you are buying into the status quo, not
changing it.

------
davemel37
I think his point is dont try too hard to control how people perceive you.
(Not whether suits are appropriate attire.)

The rule of thumb is, "other people aren't thinking about you, and if they
are, they are wondering what you are thinking about them."

That being said, just like great design influences how people perceive your
product, dressing right for the part is equally important.

I read a case study where chiropractors make more money when they wear a lab
coat, stethescope, and all their employees wear scrubs.

Your "packaging" has to match your customers expectations

and the story going on in their head

------
rmason
To me his friend is simply showing respect. Trying to make a good first
impression. That isn't trying to be someone they're not. If he's great the
VC's will know five minutes into his pitch.

------
lopatin
He basically said that if you're a little awkward, you have no business
wearing a polo. Even when it's perfectly acceptable to. Even expected.

Are you doing business? Wear at least business-casual! I believe it shows
disrespect if you don't. As if this meeting isn't important enough to you to
change out of your every day t-shirt.

~~~
rbarooah
Serious question - how and why do you think it shows disrespect, and for what?
The only thing I can think of is tradition.

~~~
lopatin
I think it shows disrespect because they will most likely be dressed up and
you won't. And I'm talking about the situation when you need something from
them, like a job offer or investment. It doesn't take any more effort to throw
a polo on as it does a t-shirt, so the fact that you chose the t-shirt, I
believe that's disrespect.

Just tradition? Yes. But traditions exist for a reason. Sure some people in
Silicon Valley may be cool and just care about your brain, but the rest of the
world doesn't work that way. Try going to an interview wearing a Simpsons
t-shirt and shorts and just try to get treated the same way as if you were in
a suit.

~~~
rbarooah
With all due respect, I don't think you've offered any kind of explanation
here.

Why is it more respectful to be dressed up if they are? You've simply restated
that it is without explanation. What makes a polo shirt more respectful than a
t-shirt?

You say there are reasons for the tradition, but you don't say what they are.
Traditions may have reasons but they aren't automatically good so it would
help the debate to actually know what you thought they were. Note that I
didn't say anything to minimize the importance of tradition in general.

Nobody is disputing that people _do_ treat each other differently because of
how they dress. The question is, what's behind it?

------
vishaldpatel
Actually, most people aren't that interested in the 'latest in fashion'
either. If fashion is what turns you on.. then don't let the computer geeks
turn you off ;).. unless they turn you on as well.. in that case how you
doin'? _points and winks_

------
lupatus
A different take on the matter: [http://boldanddetermined.com/2012/03/29/why-
you-should-dress...](http://boldanddetermined.com/2012/03/29/why-you-should-
dress-like-winner-wolf/)

------
mynameishere
The steve and woz picture reminded me of this scene:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80zFQ57RbdM&t=37m40s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80zFQ57RbdM&t=37m40s)

------
dkrich
I think it depends upon where you are in the process. If you find yourself in
the fortunate (and rare) situation where you have investors competing to hear
you, then wear whatever you want. Go in a bathrobe if it makes you happy.

If you are trying to sell something, your job is to make the person you are
selling to like you and then forget about you because of what you are showing.

I do think there is a point to be made here, but in a more abstract sense than
business presentations. Apple is actually a poor example because in their
early days Jobs was often seen making presentations in suits.

------
psycho
I think, the best "suit" for the pitch is a t-shirt with your project logo.
Well, in fact it's a best everyday clothes too. ;)

------
jkuria
Hmmh, confusing title and article. Don't you want abnormal returns? Normal is
average and average for most people is mediocre.

~~~
gruseom
What would lead you to interpret that title as confusing?

------
pjmo
People make themselves unique through their work and vision. Not solely
through their external appearance.

------
suyash
You always need to dress to impress, sometimes others but yourself first!

------
vellum
Some of this is also cultural. Foreign investors might feel they're being
slighted if you show up in jeans and a t-shirt while they're wearing suits.

~~~
nknight
Foreign investors who do not first research the region and culture they are
investing in deserve to be insulted, they've conclusively demonstrated
incompetence.

------
billpatrianakos
This is wrong. Nice sentiment that makes all us awkward people feel better but
still wrong and strangely reminds me of America's obsession with self-esteem
over real achievement.

I'm a fucking weirdo. I own it. When I'm alone or by people who get me I look
and act just how I am and it's perfectly acceptable. But that won't fly with
people I need to sell to or make a good impression on.

When I go to meetings or anywhere where I'll be networking or generally need
to make a good impression I ditch my usual attire and put on the nice clothes,
I don't talk as casually as usual, etc. am I faking it? Absolutely not! I'm
sincere and polite. I make my good impression and as any relationship matures
with these people I slowly introduce them to my eccentricities. It's a lot
like dating. I think it was an episode of Seinfeld (or some sitcom) where one
of the characters goes on a date, it goes bad, and the character remarks that
you have to let the crazy out little by little, not all at once on the first
meeting. It's kind of like that.

As humans we play a variety of different roles in our lives. We're
girlfriends, boyfriends, husbands, fathers, students, teachers, grand kids,
grandparents, friends, acquaintances, patients, etc. Each role requires us to
behave differently. Being able to slip in and out of each role when
appropriate is very healthy and far from insincere. You can play a role and
still be yourself.

I get the nice sentiment of this article and it seems innocent and nice enough
but I think it's just misguided. Being yourself doesn't mean you act the same
in all your roles. You can meet with VCs in a nice suit and still be your same
friendly, eccentric self. It's not about trying to be so,etching you're not,
it's about showing respect for the guys you're meeting, showing that you want
to be taken seriously, that you care, and that you take the meeting seriously.

I feel like many times when people advocate for "being yourself" it's not so
much about advising someone to be true to themselves but instead another form
of this self esteem movement that pretty much feels that you're born great and
you don't need to change a thing. Wrong! We all have things we need to work
on. It's good to fit in with society. The fact is, there are actually very few
people who are true eccentrics like Steve Jobs who meet with important people
wearing no shoes and smelling like patchouli. Most people who do that are
actually the ones who are faking it the most and _trying_ to be different for
the sake of being different.

I'm eccentric but you'd never know it. I fit in when I have to and it serves
me well. I'm myself whether I fit in or not. And if there's one thing I've
learned in my life as it relates to this, it's that it you're conscious of
"being yourself" in any way at all you're probably not being yourself at all.

~~~
chrischen
How does dressing up in a suit make you any better of a person?

~~~
sliverstorm
Where did he say it does? As best I can tell, he was arguing that a suit is
appropriate in some situations in much the same way showering, deodorant and
combing your hair is appropriate in some situations- and detracts from your
identity no more than showering et al does, either.

Or are you staunchly against those things, too?

~~~
rbarooah
Showering and deodorant is a distracting straw man. Nobody is talking about
being dirty or smelly.

The interesting question is _why_ is wearing a suit appropriate, other than
because it's traditional?

Are those advocating wearing suits really saying anything more than "we prefer
to stick with tradition"?

~~~
gruseom
_Showering and deodorant is a distracting straw man._

It certainly is, and the fact that people go there shows how empty the
argument is.

I'm still surprised at the consensus in this thread. Hopefully it's a random
blip and not the white blood cells finally figuring out where we've all been
:)

~~~
rbarooah
I'm not ready to conclude that the argument is empty, but I do think it's
interesting that instead of presenting actual arguments, people seem to be
getting defensive.

To me that suggests that whatever the real reason is, people aren't
comfortable with it. We won't know until someone actually gives a reason
though.

------
ktizo
I find that many people will put more trust in a scruffy programmer over one
in a suit, purely because it fits their own mental image of how a hacker
should look.

Stereotypes can cut both ways on stuff like this.

------
outside1234
the reason you can get away with sneakers and jeans is that we are in a
bubble. it won't always be that way.

~~~
daeken
The reason you can get away with sneakers and jeans is that how you look
doesn't matter, what you have to say and what you do is what matters.
Investors aren't giving you money because of your fashion sense, they're
giving you money so that they can get money back.

~~~
alaskamiller
You both haven't hit it on the head.

People have to trust what you say and what you do. How you present yourself
partly determines how people perceive and trust you.

~~~
pjscott
Are people who dress in spiffy clothing more likely to be trustworthy?

~~~
DrJokepu
I know this might sound shallow but the first time I meet someone, I actually
judge that person based on the way he or she dresses (if I suspect that he
could afford dressing properly). It tells me whether they care about
themselves, whether they have a good taste. Ultimately yes, in my experience,
there's a correlation between "spiffy clothing" and "trustworthiness".

And I'm convinced that most people do the same, whether they admit it or not.

~~~
nknight
"Properly"... What is "properly"? How was "properly" determined? What
qualifies you to judge whether someone is dressed "properly"?

~~~
DrJokepu
Fashion is clearly very subjective but it is also a visual language. If the
way you dress within a context is communicating that you don't care about
yourself, you aren't dressed properly.

~~~
nknight
I wear what is comfortable precisely because I care about myself. By your
logic, dressing in any manner other than shorts and t-shirts would either be
communicating that I don't care about myself, or would be a lie.

See how ridiculous this is?

