To quote an oft-repeated request from PG: Don't put 'YC reject' in your submission titles. You might have been not accepted, but that's quite different from being rejected -- it's a non-judgement rather than a judgement -- and it adds unnecessary noise.
That's just arguing about semantics. It's like the age old "it's not you, it's me" break-up line. Non-Acceptance is Rejection and everyone knows it.
While in general I'd agree that it doesn't add value to add "YC Reject" to the title, in this case the article talks about their YC rejection (sorry "non-acceptance") so including it makes sense.
I disagree. I think that the difference between not accepted and rejected is more about available slots.
Not accepted: "We would like to fund your startup, but we have x slots available and we already chose x startups that look more promising."
Rejected: "We are not going to fund this startup, no matter what".
The effect is the same, you do not get into Y Combinator. But in case of non acceptance this does not mean that they think your idea is not worth anything.
By that argument almost no-one's ever rejected for anything.
If a girl turns you down for a date, it doesn't matter if it's because she doesn't like you or because she just met someone she likes better than you, it's still a rejection.
Sure you have different levels of rejection, but they're all rejections nevertheless.
Precisely. Whether you're getting shot down in dating or "not being accepted" for the <x> slots for YC, at the end of the day it is the same thing-- you / your pitch are coming up short in their opportunity cost calculation.
Frankly, who gives a damn whether they like your idea if they're not willing to invest?
>Frankly, who gives a damn whether they like your idea if they're not willing to invest?
I'd have thought knowing that they believe you have a good idea, just not quite good enough would be encouraging. Whilst knowing that even if there were space you wouldn't get accepted should probably be a big indicator that you should take a step back and see if you're riding a horse or a donkey.
Similarly in dating - being rejected for someone _you_ consider a better catch is not a great problem; being rejected in favour of not having a date is far worse.
There's a difference between asking a girl out to a specific event and her saying that she's already committed that night, versus asking a girl out with an open-ended invite and having her turn you down. In both cases, you aren't taking her to the event, but in the former, you might be able to take her out the next night.
The non-acceptance of YC is like the former — it's not going to work this time, but you're more than invited to try again next time.
While I certainly understand why PG and others feel this way; I think this title gives a good frame of reference to the story ... especially given the persistence that these guys needed in the face of being rejected for funding. As a fellow Canadian entrepreneur I gotta give these guys 2 big thumbs up! Way to go.
Also speaking from the point of view of Canadian doing a startup, I'm really happy for these guys, but it highlights the frustration I know all too well now. Not being in the Valley is a huge disadvantage, especially when you read stories on TC of companies being funded that have no business model to speak of.
Yeah, but do you want to be one of those companies? That money comes with strings attached. Get rich quick schemes are appealing and all, but you still have to like it enough to do the work and to sell it.
I'm leaning more to the Wolfram Software / 37 Signals model.
No, I'm in agreement with you. I don't think the world needs yet another way to share photos on Twitter. I'm just saying it's frustrating when you see those sorts of companies getting millions thrown at them while other, perhaps more ambitious or "deserving" (by some definition of the word) projects go unfunded.
Agreed. Coming from Sri Lanka where the culture is rather conservative, it's taken a great deal of perseverance on our part to get any interest at all. In the end we decided to go ahead with our own funds (and take a big risk by working full time), but things have paid off as our app is the 7th in the US medical app store now (free apps) and has had thousands of downloads in just 10 days : http://blog.medicaljoyworks.com/prognosis-is-a-success-but-y...
P.S. Our success began just after YC rejected our idea :)
The fact that the company was rejected by YC and went on to get bought by google seems relevant given the forum and the timing.
Lots of people have recently been rejected by YC and hearing about people that have gone on to succeed seems like it might give an emotional boost to people that have applied and not got in. Seems like a worthwhile trade off for the extra "noise".
I've heard PG complain about using "YC" in titles (from guidelines: "In titles, please don't describe things by their relation to YC unless they're actually associated with YC.") But I didn't think the use of the word "reject" was the issue. YC even uses that word themselves in their "non-judgement" letter. ;)
"Groups we rejected will go on to create successful startups. If you do, we'd appreciate it if you'd send us an email telling us about it; we want to learn from our mistakes."
So they are also apparently are interested in hearing about such things too.
the rationale behind adding "YC reject" in the original title was two-fold:
1stly, to highlight that there are success stories amongst those who are not accepted into YC.
2ndly, to point out that not getting accepted by YC may have emboldened the founders' resolve to 'go all in' and focus exclusively to make their startup a success.
i still think the extra 'noise' was a justified trade-off, given that the original article mentioned the YC rejection as additional motivation.
They're interested in hearing the success stories of non-accepted companies, but that doesn't mean that the words 'YC reject' belong in a HN title. There are ways to communicate with the YC principals other than posting to HN.
With HN having a high concentration of people who are in some way interested in YC or its model, I'd think the success of rejected companies would be interesting to more than just the YC principals.
