[jacquesm]

> There is no data you could provide beyond full transparency into your entire organization(obviously not happening) that would convince anyone that there isn’t influence that they have over communication here

Since you're in a subthread of my comment: I've been here for many years and have not seen any evidence that would convince me that you are right.

And I trust both Dan and Tom to speak truthfully on this matter, they are truthful in their interaction with the community and I see no reason why this would be any different. And if it were different and if you did find proof that it is different then I don't know of HN would be for me anymore.

It is always important to realize that when you write words like 'anyone' that you are speaking for yourself.

[lovich]

You are correct. I will walk back the term “anyone” and amend it to “anyone who doesn’t personally trust the employees/mods of the organization and doesn’t assume that an organization involved in investments and VC firms will act with the same level of self interest as everyone else in that industry”

I am obviously very skeptical of any group like this, but not to the point where I would claim a stance like yours is definitionally incorrect. I’m just personally never going to have trust without the transparency given past history

[jacquesm]

I have some evidence that might sway you: there have been many threads on here that are critical of YC backed companies, sometimes pretty pointy ones.

For those threads flagging is turned off not on. So YC companies actually have it harder on HN than non-YC companies very specifically to avoid the accusation of bias.

I've also seen people associated with YC backed companies here downvoted into the toilet for spouting unpopular opinions. The only thing that possibly could happen (and that would be fairly hard to detect) is brigading on a company level, but I would accuse the likes of Google and Apple of that long before I would do so with the YC mods. Think about the opportunity cost of moderating this site. If you take that into account and then combine what you know of Dan and Tom with them selling out their integrity for a pittance if it would come to light that they did so it would wreck their reputation, which is pretty much the only compensation they really get here.

So I'm not buying it and I'm more skeptical of YC than most on here.

[lovich]

There is zero evidence that would sway me other than full transparency into all company records, which I recognize as an implausible ask.

I do not trust companies, or any organization involved in their creation and investment like this forum, to speak honestly and openly.

They have an incentive not to and their peers have proven time and time again that this incentive is too enticing to avoid.

I have seen and taken part in threads on here that were negative for ycombinator and/or their business partners be removed at almost machine level speed.

Maybe it’s the company, maybe it’s the community opinion, maybe it’s another option that I didn’t anticipate.

Regardless I assume it’s the company because they have not proven otherwise and companies in the American business setting are guilty until proven innocent to me.

[jacquesm]

Don't underestimate the power of brigading. If a couple of YC founders on YC's internal forum (much like HN) decide to get together there isn't much the moderators of HN can do about it other than to act retro-actively.

You'll see the same happen whenever someone is critical of some deity or brand (say, Steve Jobs or Apple). This is a generic problem, and it is a hard one to solve.

I've always been a fan of analyzing all of the flags retro-actively to see if they were just or not and to have a per-subject matrix that would weigh flags from particular users. So anybody that is on the gravy train at apple would find their apple flagging permissions removed, and all YC combinator founders would have their ability to flag YC related threads removed. But that is a lot of work to implement and keep accurate.

[lovich]

I don’t care about all those signs/flags? Is probably the best I can express my feelings.

I assume anything corporate or corporate aligned, which I believe this forum is, is being manipulated by the owners because they are structurally unreliable.

Corporations are counter parties who will betray you the second it’s in their benefit, and then crow about it in their quarterly earnings reports to their shareholders.

They’ll have their pocket MBAs and lawyers tell you how they have a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder returns and quote some fucking 1920s era lawsuit with Henry Ford despite not actually having to maximize return but just having to do what’s in the shareholders best interests.

The sociopaths in our society have determined that means getting more money even if other people are harmed.

I am going to continue assuming that any corporate aligned org is following the incentives of our societal structure until we change that, and if you try to convince me I should ignore the structural incentives then I am going to assume you are trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

[jacquesm]

> if you try to convince me I should ignore the structural incentives then I am going to assume you are trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

It won't be long now and you'll accuse me of being part of the YC cabal...