9 ms·

Y Combinator blacklists founder of Gab.ai

105 points by selleck 10y ago

merb 10y ago
well even if his ban wasn't deserved... he made it deserving, just watching his twitter account (not facebook etc), looks like he is somebody that is not a great guy and can't stand such things. I mean he actually posted a picture of him self and his middlefinger pointing at ycombinator?! seriously he is a hater and not somebody that should be taken seriously. insulting people or a group of people is not free speech anymore it's actually a crime.
- exolymph 10y ago
  > insulting people or a group of people is not free speech anymore it's actually a crime. This is incorrect. https://popehat.com/2016/06/11/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-the-first-amendment/ https://popehat.com/2016/06/11/hello-youve-been-referred-her...
  - merb 10y ago
    well maybe not in america. in my country (germany) you get into jail for insulting, see StGB (§ 185 Beleidigung). https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fdejure.org%2Fgesetze%2FStGB%2F185.html https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=h...
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - stevenh 10y ago
      Hopefully we'll liberate you soon.
    - maverick_iceman 10y ago
      Well, then your country doesn't have free speech.
      - merb 10y ago
        it probably has, it probably has more free speech than america. we just differ, between harm to people and free speech, we don't defend ourself that free speech needs insults to be successfull, (it doesn't). Actually there was even a law case against 'Böhmermann' wo made a satire for Erdogan, actually it was pretty harmful but the law said it was a satire so he was protected. There is a small line between free speech and being harmful and it also should be decided on a case by case basis, for some. But other people actually use our right to free speech to do harm and that is bad since that will sooner or later hurt our own right.
        nathanasmith 10y ago
        > it probably has more free speech than america I am genuinely curious about this statement. Can you name something that you can say in Germany that I cannot say in the United States? I'm pretty sure I can come up with some examples going the other way.
- maverick_iceman 10y ago
  It's insulting and objectionable speech that is in the highest need of protection. Freedom of speech is not really an issue for bland pronouncements like "I love my mother" or "I stand for peace."
  - merb 10y ago
    if I say "fuck you" it's not really freedom of speech. I directly insulted you, I didn't even want a conversation, I directly harmed you. People who think they can the "free speech" excuse for insults are just horrible, they don't understand that free speech is to actually say something in a nice manner which needs to be addressed not just to hammer on some people who do it wrong, that's a different thing and people actually don't get that right, probably because there is a really small line between insulting and objectonable speech, but still you know when somebody insulted somebody and he actually did, he didn't want to address his behavior he just expressed his meaning with insults and not any objectonable speech. If I would've been banned, I would try to address that as well, but not in such a hateful manner than he did.
    - anon_adderlan 10y ago
      > if I say "fuck you" it's not really freedom of speech. I directly insulted you, I didn't even want a conversation, I directly harmed you. But you didn't insult me because that wasn't a statement regarding my character, you clearly established you don't want a conversation, and you caused me no harm whatsoever, direct or otherwise. #SticksAndStones That's the problem with restrictions on 'insulting and objectionable' speech. Beyond the fact you just demonstrated how easy it is to get wrong by misapplying the very rules you brought up in this discussion, it also opens the door to claiming any statement regarding someone's character (such as 'incompetent', 'unemployed', 'hypocrite', 'terrorist', etc) is an insult, regardless of how true it is. Speech becomes harmful when it isolates and marginalizes. It does not become harmful just because it's offensive or enraging. So in the context of this story calling everyone a 'cuck' wasn't harmful, but the otherwise innocuous phrase 'build the wall' was, and coming up with a set of rules which fairly and consistently cover cases like that is likely impossible.
  - 10y ago
rebootthesystem 10y ago
Freedom of speech does not mean one is free from the consequences of speech. This is something a lot of young folks don't seem to understand. You can say anything you want. Go for it. And you will own the consequences of what you said, whatever they might be. I offer this as a general comment. Not taking sides on the issue highlighted by the post. I simply think it is important to point out this reality in case it is lost in all the nonsense this election has managed to produce.
- sabertoothed 10y ago
  "Freedom of speech does not mean one is free from the consequences of speech." Not sure this makes sense. It's like saying you are free to murder someone. But then you have to live with the consequences. Which leads the concept of freedom ad absurdum. My point is that freedom of speech has never been unlimited. In my country it is slightly more restrictive than in the US but even the US does not have a 100% perfect freedom of speech. And that is a good(!) thing.
  - exolymph 10y ago
    It means that you can say anything you want [within narrow and specific legal limits] but so can everyone else. Freedom of speech =/= freedom from criticism or freedom from censure. Censorship by the government is prohibited but censorship by a private entity like YC is perfectly legal.
  - maverick_iceman 10y ago
    If in your country government censors any speech then you're not living in a free country.
    - sabertoothed 10y ago
      If that is the case, then you do not live in a free country. And then a free country would not even be desirable. Examples for the US that apparently are exceptions to free speech: - Incitement / fighting words - False statement of facts - Child pornography - Commercial speech (special rules apply) I am not sure if you are allowed to insult a police officer.
phonon 10y ago
Reminds me of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11633270#11633517 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11633270#11633517
coolswan 10y ago
sort of sad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVI1NpCBF88 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVI1NpCBF88 (tldr; same guy on how he overcame bullying - the very thing he's now doing)
- merb 10y ago
  money makes people dirty.
mundo 10y ago
Not to sound conspiratorial, but isn't Gab.ai trying to market itself as a censorship-free twitter clone for alt-right types? If so, what better way to generate brand awareness and users than by picking fights with liberals?
- Retra 10y ago
  What good is your brand if everyone hates it?
  - arama471 10y ago
    Unfortunately (as one might be able to tell from the election results) not everyone hates Trump. In fact his supporters would likely make a sizeable consumer base.
- nols 10y ago
  Seems like it, I Googled him to get a better understanding and several prominent links were Breitbart articles about other posts of his that were removed from Twitter and Facebook. Looks like a lot of it is just drumming up support for his completely free speech Twitter clone.
  - gotlove 10y ago
    Also, not really 'completely free speech' either. From the Breitbart article: > a zero tolerance policy for promoting terrorism Everyone has their own version of acceptable free speech. Him using 'free speech' as his tagline and yet having restrictions is hypocritical.
    - astrange 10y ago
      That'd be the US government's version of acceptable free speech. You can't just start a legit business with VC backing that allows terrorism and child pornography. And it gets more and more expensive to run the service the closer to the line you allow.
eeeeeeeeeeeee 10y ago
It sounds like the "build the wall" comment was not the entire issue. This guy sounds like a huge asshole and that is what got him booted.
internaut 10y ago
Torba, if you're reading this, consider that Curtis Yarvin's Tlon receives angel investment from well known SV VCs and he also posts here regularly. So the guy who literally invented neoreaction isn't suppressed by YC because of his views then it is pretty unlikely you're getting persecuted because of yours. Nick Denton constantly overreached in using freedom of speech as a cover for just simply fucking with people until it blew up in his face. Don't be the alt-right's version of that. You can afford to be magnanimous and give some gesture of conciliation. Do you really want to be giving Pao material to work with? Fighting censorship is serious business, forget this teacup war, nobody will remember any of it in a year.
sama 10y ago
We support free speech, obviously. And we're happy to fund people with all sorts of different political views. We do not allow harassment, for which Andrew unfortunately set a new bar in our community. You can look at his Twitter or Facebook for plenty of public examples, to say nothing of what he's said privately. As per our previous comments, when a founder violates our ethics statement, we remove them from the community.
- angersock 10y ago
  While I'm generally rather suspect of you folks and your moral authority, this is an example of the behavior you're referring to: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAg4AXXcAITru4.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAg4AXXcAITru4.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAbtwQUcAApPQa.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAbtwQUcAApPQa.jpg https://twitter.com/torbahax/status/797110760556167168 https://twitter.com/torbahax/status/797110760556167168 From a pure business standpoint, fuck that guy. He didn't really articulate his views in any way that could remotely be considered constructive, and if the rest of his behavior matches that, it's difficult to imagine keeping him around.
  - hawkice 10y ago
    The first and third ones were clearly mean-spirited, but the second one seems like it's in-bounds for society as a whole ("coward", while obviously impolite, can't possibly be worse than "racist", which is apparently an in-bounds part of political conversation). Not an insane request to abide by either: if they are literally asking for it, naming and shaming seems opt-in-able.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - nickthemagicman 10y ago
    Wow, just wow. Jerk! Also that dude needs to get off /b/ every now and then. He sounds like hes got a box of chicken tendies next to his keyboard...
dang 10y ago
The submitted title was "Y Combinator blacklists founder of Gab.ai for saying “build the wall”", but we shortened it because it doesn't sound like that was the reason. (I don't have any information about this beyond skimming the current thread and looking at a few of the things people have linked to.)
eva1984 10y ago
Troll
Hydraulix989 10y ago
I wonder how different he must have been for YC to make the call to fund him in the first place. Even watching his old YouTube videos, I can tell something is "off" with his personality (maybe confirmation bias at play).
minimaxir 10y ago
Important context: Said founder entered YC working on an ad optimization platform, but recently pivoted to Twitter for the alt-right.
- rvcamo 10y ago
  Wrong. It's the Twitter for free speech.
  - drivingmenuts 10y ago
    Whatever. Unless it's carefully moderated (ie., censored, to some) it will gather a large collection of angry right-wing posters or angry left-wing posters. One side will harass the other and the other side will eventually go elsewhere. Then it will be just another echo chamber. If the creator has pivoted to the alt-right, it's a pretty sure guess that it will wind up being another 8chan/stormfront/what have you.
    - nailer 10y ago
      You could bubble them. Left folk who don't like right wing folk only see left people, right folk who don't like left wink folk in their own bubble. Let people see who they want to see, but if they & enough of their friends say "don't show me X" then don't show them X.
  - hyperpape 10y ago
    ...you mean Twitter?
    - VaChildAbuse 10y ago
      Twitter shadowbanned me for posting details of child abuse I experienced that left me disabled. These details included the names of people involved and summaries of acts committed against me. Some of the principals in these acts and all of the accessories to them are employees of a school board, police department, city government, and political boards. I posted links to articles from local media showing that there's a culture of child abuse in the city and that it still pervades more than 25 years after I was abused. I identified a certain juvenile detention facility and explained how it was designed to be and operated as a wholesale child abuse factory. I posted a report from the Department of Justice calling out the state on the ways that it abuses children. Twitter apparently thinks that trying to effect positive change, to-wit, ending the wide scale child abuse and holding the abusers accountable to law, is a bad thing.
tomohawk 10y ago
Sounds like YC is building their own wall
- ec109685 10y ago
  Why does it sound like that? Did you take a look at the content posted?
livestyle 10y ago
Funny how YC is quickly becoming the antithesis of all the great PG essays..
- Hydraulix989 10y ago
  Explain?
RickS 10y ago
From the screenshot he himself provided [1], it looks like he was confronted about making people at YC feel unsafe, and responded by saying they "shouldn't be on the internet". Contrarian views are one thing. Addressing the people who fund your company like a belligerent troll is another. You're entitled to free speech, you're not entitled to a captive ear to hear it. [1] http://i.imgur.com/ReFx2Mr.png http://i.imgur.com/ReFx2Mr.png
- atom-morgan 10y ago
  "feel unsafe" has been more subjective and ridiculous than ever.
  - RickS 10y ago
    > "feel unsafe" has been more subjective and ridiculous than ever. Sure, in the sense of the "liberals and safe spaces" macro topic, I'll concede that. But YC is big on bringing in founders from other countries and giving them the tools to be successful in America. In those scenarios YC is the foundation of their life in the country. Funding, documentation, network, etc. To have voices in the group that's supposed to help you start talking about "build the wall" and deporting people, especially in the context of the larger Trump political movement? Yeah, if a company paid for me to come to a foreign land and do business, but members started talking about deporting all the guys like me and building a wall to keep them out, I would feel uncertain about my future, my business, and my residency. unsafe. I think it's completely reasonable in this case.
  - minimaxir 10y ago
    For posterity, here is the beginning of the referenced Facebook thread (also linked to by the founder on Twitter): https://imgur.com/a/dWgdV https://imgur.com/a/dWgdV
  - mundo 10y ago
    "unsafe" has become a bit of a buzzword in the interminable red-vs-blue wars, but everything else about this would've played out the same way if she had said he was "inappropriate" or "unprofessional". Looks to me like free speech is still free and trolling at work still has consequences and there's not much to see here unless you're personally involved with one of the companies.

105 points by selleck 10y ago

merb 10y ago

well even if his ban wasn't deserved... he made it deserving, just watching his twitter account (not facebook etc), looks like he is somebody that is not a great guy and can't stand such things. I mean he actually posted a picture of him self and his middlefinger pointing at ycombinator?! seriously he is a hater and not somebody that should be taken seriously. insulting people or a group of people is not free speech anymore it's actually a crime.

exolymph 10y ago
> insulting people or a group of people is not free speech anymore it's actually a crime. This is incorrect. https://popehat.com/2016/06/11/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-the-first-amendment/ https://popehat.com/2016/06/11/hello-youve-been-referred-her...
- merb 10y ago
  well maybe not in america. in my country (germany) you get into jail for insulting, see StGB (§ 185 Beleidigung). https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fdejure.org%2Fgesetze%2FStGB%2F185.html https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=h...
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - stevenh 10y ago
    Hopefully we'll liberate you soon.
  - maverick_iceman 10y ago
    Well, then your country doesn't have free speech.
    - merb 10y ago
      it probably has, it probably has more free speech than america. we just differ, between harm to people and free speech, we don't defend ourself that free speech needs insults to be successfull, (it doesn't). Actually there was even a law case against 'Böhmermann' wo made a satire for Erdogan, actually it was pretty harmful but the law said it was a satire so he was protected. There is a small line between free speech and being harmful and it also should be decided on a case by case basis, for some. But other people actually use our right to free speech to do harm and that is bad since that will sooner or later hurt our own right.
      - nathanasmith 10y ago
        > it probably has more free speech than america I am genuinely curious about this statement. Can you name something that you can say in Germany that I cannot say in the United States? I'm pretty sure I can come up with some examples going the other way.
maverick_iceman 10y ago
It's insulting and objectionable speech that is in the highest need of protection. Freedom of speech is not really an issue for bland pronouncements like "I love my mother" or "I stand for peace."
- merb 10y ago
  if I say "fuck you" it's not really freedom of speech. I directly insulted you, I didn't even want a conversation, I directly harmed you. People who think they can the "free speech" excuse for insults are just horrible, they don't understand that free speech is to actually say something in a nice manner which needs to be addressed not just to hammer on some people who do it wrong, that's a different thing and people actually don't get that right, probably because there is a really small line between insulting and objectonable speech, but still you know when somebody insulted somebody and he actually did, he didn't want to address his behavior he just expressed his meaning with insults and not any objectonable speech. If I would've been banned, I would try to address that as well, but not in such a hateful manner than he did.
  - anon_adderlan 10y ago
    > if I say "fuck you" it's not really freedom of speech. I directly insulted you, I didn't even want a conversation, I directly harmed you. But you didn't insult me because that wasn't a statement regarding my character, you clearly established you don't want a conversation, and you caused me no harm whatsoever, direct or otherwise. #SticksAndStones That's the problem with restrictions on 'insulting and objectionable' speech. Beyond the fact you just demonstrated how easy it is to get wrong by misapplying the very rules you brought up in this discussion, it also opens the door to claiming any statement regarding someone's character (such as 'incompetent', 'unemployed', 'hypocrite', 'terrorist', etc) is an insult, regardless of how true it is. Speech becomes harmful when it isolates and marginalizes. It does not become harmful just because it's offensive or enraging. So in the context of this story calling everyone a 'cuck' wasn't harmful, but the otherwise innocuous phrase 'build the wall' was, and coming up with a set of rules which fairly and consistently cover cases like that is likely impossible.
- 10y ago

rebootthesystem 10y ago

Freedom of speech does not mean one is free from the consequences of speech. This is something a lot of young folks don't seem to understand. You can say anything you want. Go for it. And you will own the consequences of what you said, whatever they might be. I offer this as a general comment. Not taking sides on the issue highlighted by the post. I simply think it is important to point out this reality in case it is lost in all the nonsense this election has managed to produce.

sabertoothed 10y ago
"Freedom of speech does not mean one is free from the consequences of speech." Not sure this makes sense. It's like saying you are free to murder someone. But then you have to live with the consequences. Which leads the concept of freedom ad absurdum. My point is that freedom of speech has never been unlimited. In my country it is slightly more restrictive than in the US but even the US does not have a 100% perfect freedom of speech. And that is a good(!) thing.
- exolymph 10y ago
  It means that you can say anything you want [within narrow and specific legal limits] but so can everyone else. Freedom of speech =/= freedom from criticism or freedom from censure. Censorship by the government is prohibited but censorship by a private entity like YC is perfectly legal.
- maverick_iceman 10y ago
  If in your country government censors any speech then you're not living in a free country.
  - sabertoothed 10y ago
    If that is the case, then you do not live in a free country. And then a free country would not even be desirable. Examples for the US that apparently are exceptions to free speech: - Incitement / fighting words - False statement of facts - Child pornography - Commercial speech (special rules apply) I am not sure if you are allowed to insult a police officer.

phonon 10y ago

Reminds me of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11633270#11633517 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11633270#11633517

coolswan 10y ago

sort of sad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVI1NpCBF88 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVI1NpCBF88 (tldr; same guy on how he overcame bullying - the very thing he's now doing)

merb 10y ago
money makes people dirty.

mundo 10y ago

Not to sound conspiratorial, but isn't Gab.ai trying to market itself as a censorship-free twitter clone for alt-right types? If so, what better way to generate brand awareness and users than by picking fights with liberals?

Retra 10y ago
What good is your brand if everyone hates it?
- arama471 10y ago
  Unfortunately (as one might be able to tell from the election results) not everyone hates Trump. In fact his supporters would likely make a sizeable consumer base.
nols 10y ago
Seems like it, I Googled him to get a better understanding and several prominent links were Breitbart articles about other posts of his that were removed from Twitter and Facebook. Looks like a lot of it is just drumming up support for his completely free speech Twitter clone.
- gotlove 10y ago
  Also, not really 'completely free speech' either. From the Breitbart article: > a zero tolerance policy for promoting terrorism Everyone has their own version of acceptable free speech. Him using 'free speech' as his tagline and yet having restrictions is hypocritical.
  - astrange 10y ago
    That'd be the US government's version of acceptable free speech. You can't just start a legit business with VC backing that allows terrorism and child pornography. And it gets more and more expensive to run the service the closer to the line you allow.

eeeeeeeeeeeee 10y ago

It sounds like the "build the wall" comment was not the entire issue. This guy sounds like a huge asshole and that is what got him booted.

internaut 10y ago

Torba, if you're reading this, consider that Curtis Yarvin's Tlon receives angel investment from well known SV VCs and he also posts here regularly. So the guy who literally invented neoreaction isn't suppressed by YC because of his views then it is pretty unlikely you're getting persecuted because of yours. Nick Denton constantly overreached in using freedom of speech as a cover for just simply fucking with people until it blew up in his face. Don't be the alt-right's version of that. You can afford to be magnanimous and give some gesture of conciliation. Do you really want to be giving Pao material to work with? Fighting censorship is serious business, forget this teacup war, nobody will remember any of it in a year.

sama 10y ago

We support free speech, obviously. And we're happy to fund people with all sorts of different political views. We do not allow harassment, for which Andrew unfortunately set a new bar in our community. You can look at his Twitter or Facebook for plenty of public examples, to say nothing of what he's said privately. As per our previous comments, when a founder violates our ethics statement, we remove them from the community.

angersock 10y ago
While I'm generally rather suspect of you folks and your moral authority, this is an example of the behavior you're referring to: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAg4AXXcAITru4.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAg4AXXcAITru4.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAbtwQUcAApPQa.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxAbtwQUcAApPQa.jpg https://twitter.com/torbahax/status/797110760556167168 https://twitter.com/torbahax/status/797110760556167168 From a pure business standpoint, fuck that guy. He didn't really articulate his views in any way that could remotely be considered constructive, and if the rest of his behavior matches that, it's difficult to imagine keeping him around.
- hawkice 10y ago
  The first and third ones were clearly mean-spirited, but the second one seems like it's in-bounds for society as a whole ("coward", while obviously impolite, can't possibly be worse than "racist", which is apparently an in-bounds part of political conversation). Not an insane request to abide by either: if they are literally asking for it, naming and shaming seems opt-in-able.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- nickthemagicman 10y ago
  Wow, just wow. Jerk! Also that dude needs to get off /b/ every now and then. He sounds like hes got a box of chicken tendies next to his keyboard...

dang 10y ago

The submitted title was "Y Combinator blacklists founder of Gab.ai for saying “build the wall”", but we shortened it because it doesn't sound like that was the reason. (I don't have any information about this beyond skimming the current thread and looking at a few of the things people have linked to.)

eva1984 10y ago

Troll

Hydraulix989 10y ago

I wonder how different he must have been for YC to make the call to fund him in the first place. Even watching his old YouTube videos, I can tell something is "off" with his personality (maybe confirmation bias at play).

minimaxir 10y ago

Important context: Said founder entered YC working on an ad optimization platform, but recently pivoted to Twitter for the alt-right.

rvcamo 10y ago
Wrong. It's the Twitter for free speech.
- drivingmenuts 10y ago
  Whatever. Unless it's carefully moderated (ie., censored, to some) it will gather a large collection of angry right-wing posters or angry left-wing posters. One side will harass the other and the other side will eventually go elsewhere. Then it will be just another echo chamber. If the creator has pivoted to the alt-right, it's a pretty sure guess that it will wind up being another 8chan/stormfront/what have you.
  - nailer 10y ago
    You could bubble them. Left folk who don't like right wing folk only see left people, right folk who don't like left wink folk in their own bubble. Let people see who they want to see, but if they & enough of their friends say "don't show me X" then don't show them X.
- hyperpape 10y ago
  ...you mean Twitter?
  - VaChildAbuse 10y ago
    Twitter shadowbanned me for posting details of child abuse I experienced that left me disabled. These details included the names of people involved and summaries of acts committed against me. Some of the principals in these acts and all of the accessories to them are employees of a school board, police department, city government, and political boards. I posted links to articles from local media showing that there's a culture of child abuse in the city and that it still pervades more than 25 years after I was abused. I identified a certain juvenile detention facility and explained how it was designed to be and operated as a wholesale child abuse factory. I posted a report from the Department of Justice calling out the state on the ways that it abuses children. Twitter apparently thinks that trying to effect positive change, to-wit, ending the wide scale child abuse and holding the abusers accountable to law, is a bad thing.

tomohawk 10y ago

Sounds like YC is building their own wall

ec109685 10y ago
Why does it sound like that? Did you take a look at the content posted?

livestyle 10y ago

Funny how YC is quickly becoming the antithesis of all the great PG essays..

Hydraulix989 10y ago
Explain?

RickS 10y ago

From the screenshot he himself provided [1], it looks like he was confronted about making people at YC feel unsafe, and responded by saying they "shouldn't be on the internet". Contrarian views are one thing. Addressing the people who fund your company like a belligerent troll is another. You're entitled to free speech, you're not entitled to a captive ear to hear it. [1] http://i.imgur.com/ReFx2Mr.png http://i.imgur.com/ReFx2Mr.png

atom-morgan 10y ago
"feel unsafe" has been more subjective and ridiculous than ever.
- RickS 10y ago
  > "feel unsafe" has been more subjective and ridiculous than ever. Sure, in the sense of the "liberals and safe spaces" macro topic, I'll concede that. But YC is big on bringing in founders from other countries and giving them the tools to be successful in America. In those scenarios YC is the foundation of their life in the country. Funding, documentation, network, etc. To have voices in the group that's supposed to help you start talking about "build the wall" and deporting people, especially in the context of the larger Trump political movement? Yeah, if a company paid for me to come to a foreign land and do business, but members started talking about deporting all the guys like me and building a wall to keep them out, I would feel uncertain about my future, my business, and my residency. unsafe. I think it's completely reasonable in this case.
- minimaxir 10y ago
  For posterity, here is the beginning of the referenced Facebook thread (also linked to by the founder on Twitter): https://imgur.com/a/dWgdV https://imgur.com/a/dWgdV
- mundo 10y ago
  "unsafe" has become a bit of a buzzword in the interminable red-vs-blue wars, but everything else about this would've played out the same way if she had said he was "inappropriate" or "unprofessional". Looks to me like free speech is still free and trolling at work still has consequences and there's not much to see here unless you're personally involved with one of the companies.