TLDR. YC seems to engage in a shady business practice, which I believe should be known by more people. On the one hand, YC, or anybody, can do anything that they want (whether even legal or not). But, on the other hand, YC's "unjust" business practice is particularly troublesome considering that they put on this facade of "benevolence" and "mission-driven" businesses, etc. What they are doing is not even an "optimization". It just shows that their benevolence facade is... just a facade, ultimately deceitful and duplicitous. If you think about it, it's really no surprise that profit-driven companies like YC put "success" and "money" before anything and everything else, including other human beings.
First, I'm not here to grieve, or complain. I haven't thought about this for a long time, ever since I left that startup. I even (almost entirely) quit programming because my last experience was so bad, and because I no longer have any delusions about "working for a startup", whatever romantic ideas that would conjure up in your mind. It was a real shock to me to find out that the CEO of that last startup put me on a blacklist, considering what really happened. I'm not gonna go into details here, but remember there are always two sides to the story. Let's just say that he was less than honest, in my standard. He had absolutely no sense of integrity. I couldn't work with him any longer even if somebody paid me a million dollars. (And, I can almost vividly imagine he complaining about his startup problems and blaming them on the "bad" former employees. Yes, he was that kind of person.)
Whatever YC does, as a private company and investor, it's probably in their prerogative. (And, they will likely deny it, in public, if they have even a modicum of sense of rightfulness). I know that a lot of people who hang out on the boards like HN have an aspiration to start their own startups some day, and many people romanticize about working for startups. YC is still really respected for by them, needless to say. On the other hand, I am nobody. Whatever I say here, I know that very few people will listen to. Regardless, I'm writing this to give some context, if anybody would listen, and as something to think about for anyone who is thinking about "making the world a better place", "for all of us".
First, let's consider the following. Say, the CEO of a YC startup says to YC that this person is terrible, or that this person did this and that, and, let's suppose, YC bans all startups they manage, as a "law", from hiring this person, without giving this person any chance to respond. Do you think that that is fair? As stated, YC can do whatever they like. But, would you "approve of" such a policy, e.g., for blacklisting people simply because someone said something? Or, even the very idea of categorically "blacklisting any human beings"? For any purpose?
(Although I am using this particular example, this kind of instances are not that rare in the corporate world. I've seen cases where one allegation or two of an employee(s) made against another employee had him/her fired, without giving them a fair chance to defend themselves. Private companies can do whatever they want as long as it's not against the law. But, the question is, would _you_ work for companies like that who engage in such a medieval business practice? Now, what's the difference between "startups" and "evil corporations", metaphorically?)
...
dang•1h ago