[nisthana]

I accept all opinions - but not the ones that are not useful. For example someone said something about roulette. How is that useful? Why did they even spend time to write that statement? I love critical comments, I really love them. I have replied to each comment above. What I can't take is sarcasm. That's it.

[mseebach]

You quite frankly appear to have somewhat of an attitude. You come off as defensive and carrying a chip on your shoulder. Why on earth would you get yourself involved in a petty fight over people writing comments that aren't "useful" on your post? Have you never used this site before[1]?

People try to give you feedback that your site feels fake to them. You're not internalising it, you launch straight into a hurt defence. Someone quoted from YC policy, presumably to shed some light on the situation, and you dismiss it as a stock response written by a lawyer, lecture them on what they should be doing and start praising a competitor.

In short, if you already have all the answers, what do you need YC for?

1: Frankly, your apparent confusion as to how commenting works is a bit jarring - it befits someone asking for help to acquaint himself a bit with how things work, but that's the least of your problems.

[nisthana]

Ok this I feel is super useful for me. You gave me actionable feedback and I am super thankful. I will definitely improve upon this. Yep I get defensive, thats something I am working on. I took all the feedback to heart. The person who commented on the "fake testimonial" did change his statement (check it out). I tried to find a real user image but I felt I cannot use any user's image without asking them. So I am trying to internalize all comments. I also replied to everyone who took time to help me. I have not used this site much. I have been active since the YC application days. > Why on earth would you get yourself involved in a petty fight over people writing comments that aren't "useful" on your post? - Yep I should not have. It was not worth. My bad.

> Have you never used this site before - Only sometime

> You're not internalising it, you launch straight into a hurt defence - I will improve

> Someone quoted from YC policy, presumably to shed some light on the situation, and you dismiss it as a stock response written by a lawyer - I still think its a stock response. YC should do what it should. I don't expect everyone to agree with me (hope this is not attitudish, i am simply narrating my stand on it without being influenced by anyone)

>start praising a competitor - Whats wrong in praising a better service? Isnt that the freedom of such forums that people can express their opinions?

> if you already have all the answers, what do you need YC for? - I don't have all the answers. I still need to find out the answer to my original question - why did YC reject me twice. Some folks have helped me by telling me that its combination of team/domain expertise and traction. But would have been nice if YC could have told me that themselves. >1: Frankly, your apparent confusion as to how commenting works is a bit jarring - it befits someone asking for help to acquaint himself a bit with how things work, but that's the least of your problems - I am not sure if I understand.

[mseebach]

> The person who commented on the "fake testimonial" did change his statement (check it out).

It doesn't matter. That person almost certainly isn't a potential customer. I'm not either. Changing our minds is a waste of your time. You won't get a chance to debate the people who come to your site and turn away because it looks fake.

> I still think its a stock response. YC should do what it should. I don't expect everyone to agree with me (hope this is not attitudish, i am simply narrating my stand on it without being influenced by anyone)

The attitude is that it seems like it's very important for you to be right about things that doesn't matter (or you have very poor judgment in seeing what matters). That's a very unpleasant trait, and if the YC interviewers caught even a little bit of that, I suspect they'd fail you flat out on that alone.

> Whats wrong in praising a better service? Isnt that the freedom of such forums that people can express their opinions?

What's wrong is that it's off-topic (and also has a bit of the "important to be right" thing above). People came to your thread to help you find out why you didn't get accepted, not to debate whether YC is stupid.

> I don't have all the answers. I still need to find out the answer to my original question - why did YC reject me twice. Some folks have helped me by telling me that its combination of team/domain expertise and traction. But would have been nice if YC could have told me that themselves

"Having all the answers" is a figure of speech. It means "not listening when people are trying to answer your questions". Nobody here can tell you why you were rejected, but they can offer ideas. And it looks a lot like you're not listening to any ideas that doesn't fit your preconceived notion of why you were rejected. How do you know that the people telling you it's because of "team/domain expertise and traction", are right and not the ones that think your website looks fake? Hence, having all the answers.

> I am not sure if I understand.

Your style of commenting is all over the place, and suggests that you have not spend some time acquainting yourself with the way comments are done here. That's a bit impolite, but obviously can't be the reason you were rejected. On the other hand, if it's indicative of poor communication skills, then that could be a big problem.