I'd actually like to see the winners bypass an interview stage. As discussed on the previous results thread I think this is an opportunity for YC to shed any biases in their interviewing process and see what the results are.
Are there biases in the YC community that will come into play? Surely. Are they different biases than the YC interview process? That's why we experiment.
If you're going to have a interview step, then by all means list it. But I think it's an open question whether the interview step is a good idea, at least in the context of relatively rare contests for a Fellowship spot.
I also don't think a more elaborate voting system is needed, but requiring voters to have a certain karma and/or account age threshold seems like a good idea.
How about only HN accounts with a verified email address can vote, and then you vote via a "Sign up for their mailing list" button? That way you're forcing voters to have some skin in the game, and also leaving the startups who participate with a tangible asset.
I just only comment when I feel like I can add something to the conversation, and always pause before commenting (stops me from getting into flame wars)
So age of account should have some say, or at least if they can see how often you read and vote for stories and comments here.
I think that's a bad idea given how different the startups are. It doesn't make sense to me to compare for example AirBnB (what it was when they applied) with Tarsnap or AutoMicroFarm with Cruise.
Which probably isn't the best phrasing, but I'm serious about the question, for people on HN the motivation to participate is that it is fun or interesting or whatever, so I wonder how many rounds of votes you can squeeze out of that.
1. Make this "HN selects startups which get invited for YC interviews", i.e., a feeder into the existing system. Essentially, use HN to supplement the network of YC alumni who help out with the application-filtering.
2. Since YC will explicitly still have the final say, open this to both Fellowships and YC Core applications.
3. Have a standardized form. Or possibly even a "make this application public" checkbox on the regular YC application form.
4. Use a more sophisticated voting system. I think a "which of these two looks better" combined with a form of Elo rating could work quite well.
EDIT: To the people voting this comment up: Do you agree with all four of those suggestions, just some of them, or are you voting it up because you like the fact that I'm offering ideas despite thinking that these four are all bad ones? As Dan has said a few times recently, discussion is more useful than votes. :-)