zlacker

I'm a YC alum and it's an important bullet point on my resume.

I would rather YC leadership kept their political positions to themselves as much as is reasonably possible. It dilutes the value of that bullet point -- I want it to communicate things about my work ethic and competency. I don't want it to imply _anything_ about my political opinions.

I don't have a problem with tech leaders holding political positions, nor do I have a problem with them making personal donations based on those opinions. Quietly.

>>jnovek+(OP)
Why the double standard? Why should or shouldn't it be couth for someone to talk about their political positions? Everyone is a human, and you don't get anything done in politics unless there is mass action, which means we must have conversations, public AND private, about politics.

I'm sorry, if you are like "I'm glad they gave me the money and the label" and can't take it when someone associated makes an embarassing human moment, you are just trying to have your cake and eat it too. Do better.

>>jnovek+(OP)
> I want it to communicate things about my work ethic and competency

Doesn't it just communicate that you got in to YC?

>>throwa+n7
I don't think the parent wants to eat their cake and have it too; they're torn between having the credentials or abandoning them because it's embarassing. And who can blame them? I've never said the words "Y Combinator" outside the West coast and got a positive reaction.

YC can have political opinions, but they should acknowledge the opportunity cost of putting their politics before their community. Behavior like the one linked in the OP is incredibly petty and probably should make the associated parties feel bad about working with that kind of person. Lord knows I feel ashamed to be an HN user today.

>>petese+x8
A CEO represents the organization that they're a CEO of. It's natural and not entirely unwarranted for people to think that a CEO's behavior and attitude is also reflected to some degree by the organization itself.

>>throwa+n7
because they want the signal to come from what YC has accomplished and represents, not the personal opinions of someone associated with them who's leveraging his unrelated benefits in a socially very unacceptable way.

>>throwa+n7
Do better? No, Tan and YC need to understand this will impact their image.

Free speech has consequences. And speech that has unhinged threats (even if it has a disclaimer that it's not) has potential consequences with law enforcement.

I don't think it's out of line for someone who's investing their time and effort into an organization to be critical of leadership.

>>throwa+n7
Are you suggesting branding is irrelevant?

>>r00fus+kh1
nobody is saying free speech doesn't have consequences. I'm saying taking money and reputation has consequences too.

>>jnovek+(OP)
I'd rather they do it publicly than secretly tbh. At least you know where they stand.

As for companies, judge their actions, not their words.

>>throwa+2L1
But at what point do 'consequences' start to negate the 'free' in speech?

I'd argue you have reached the limits of free speach the moment there are consequences for just the speech.