[kposehn]

My issue is that you made a blanket judgement of something with seemingly little input or reasoning. Why do you feel that way? Go into some detail at the very least, instead of just dismissing it out of hand.

The security questions could be answered by then more easily instead of having to dig - I get that. But that’s not enough imho.

You have the right to express your opinion, for sure. But when you make a blanket judgement with little you’re going against HN guidelines:

> Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say face-to-face. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

[gitgud]

In my opinion, he did outline a few reasons for why he felt that way, albeit concise.

The HN guidelines do not expect everyone to be positive. Negative feedback that's justified is important in any community.

[dsr_]

At this point, anyone starting a business to be an outbound call-center or to send email on behalf of third parties should be assumed to be a bad actor, and the burden of proof is on them.

This wasn't a blanket judgement without input. This was a judgement based on the available evidence, and particularly pointing at holes where one would expect a white hat to have solid documents.

I wonder if this is one of those startups where YC said "this team is solid, they'll likely pivot into something worthwhile".