Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

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