[jkelsey]

> “He is not a partner,” Manalac said. “He never has been. We have 19 full-time partners who work very closely with the companies.” She went on to say that she “can understand why people would be very scared and nervous about that but he will definitely have no interaction with the ACLU.

So why not cut ties already? If Thiel isn't involved anymore, and he's working with the Trump administration, why doesn't he resign his partnership and move on?

[dragonwriter]

> > “He is not a partner,” Manalac said. “He never has been. [...]”

> why doesn't he resign his partnership and move on?

Because to resign his partnership, he'd first have to be a partner.

[jkelsey]

What are you talking about? Yes he is: http://blog.ycombinator.com/welcome-peter/

[dragonwriter]

> What are you talking about?

I'm quoting the statement from YC Partner Kat Manalac in TFA, which was also quoted in the post I was responding to.

If you want to ask why YC is denying that he has ever been a partner now after welcoming him as a "part-time partner" previously, well, you'd have to ask someone else.

But it doesn't make sense to quote a statement about how he never has been a partner and respond to it with a question about why he doesn't resign his partnership.

[jkelsey]

It does make sense. Y Combinator has a relationship with Thiel. He's been declared as a partner many times in the past; now they're saying he's not. That's why I'm asking the rhetorical question. I'm afraid you're taking the passage quoted here and removing all other context.

[haaen]

Manalac could have said that Thiel is a part time partner.