zlacker

>>femfos+(OP)
Anyone who is pragmatic and willing to take open and honest advice/criticism from people they respect needs to advertise themselves that way in today’s environment. It is on the entrepreneur to convince the person from whom they are seeking advice that they will not regret giving it. As an alternative, perhaps investors should offer an optional “advice NDA” that would allow them to speak more freely, with less fear of social media scorn.

>>downan+OI
For the (at least) 2 people that downvoted this: what part of this comment is controversial or offends you? I don’t see it, and I would love to understand. Downvoting without comment does no good for anyone.

>>downan+sN
I didn't downvote, as I think this adds to the conversation. But as a _systemic solution_, I don't think the "advice NDA" holds up.

As a one-off (or a personal "hack"), the NDA is an offering of empathy. Sharing sincere feedback is hard. Offering the NDA shows that the advice-asker is worried about the advice-giver's well-being. It's nice and genuine, and I hope it will work.

But, this idea seems so GOOD at first blush, that I'm afraid it will become widespread and lose sincerity. Anytime feedback is involved, the NDA appears as legal boilerplate. It's no longer a personal connection built on shared vulnerability. Instead, it's a corporate threat: "If you want advice, we can either be friends or go to court."