Hacker News Reader

Comment by DonsDiscountGas | Hacker News Reader

Not exactly the point of the article, but I didn't understand how this guy lying and getting a couple meetings implies that "the game" is rigged.

View on HN

It's not what you know but who you know/where you studies/who you worked for.

Are these legitimate signals of success or signs that "the game is rigged" to advantage those with existing privilege? Both perhaps?

it's rigged against people that dont have that background. because plenty of people dont have that background (possibly even equally impressive, or more hard working, better leadership experience, better ideas) and without the pedigree get passed over by vcs, but this guy could fake everything, not get vetted, and get an inbound meeting on the right credentialism.

And the irony is, the vc couldnt see it either!!

I pointed out in the article that this is the system working as intended. Getting a meeting with a VC is not the same thing as getting an investment. And if you're getting thousands of emails, it makes sense to prioritize the most impressive-sounding people as opposed to choosing randomly or something.

There was also no control for this experiment, so we don't know what the alternative even looks like.

i think youre missing the point. because it is so utterly lazy, in many ways the signals that vcs are looking at might be antisignals, in the same way that being in "30 under 30" is not a great signal for potential but maybe a good signal for fraud/being great at getting coffee at morgan stanley.

and if it is, it's toxic because people get into entrepreneurship because they think they have a shot. if they don't, because stupid credential X is not in their pocket, why the fuck should they even try?

of course there is not control. this is a tweet, not a submission to PNAS

Reply on news.ycombinator.com