Because a) that is how it was represented to me, albeit with very high standards, and b) I don't feel comfortable massaging the truth like that. If and when I go into detail I can explain things that I think go in and against my favor.

Also, mathattack's answer: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=mathattack

A smart interviewer doesn't need that to be wordsmithed. I would follow up by asking some questions about what it was about the position or culture or company that didn't work out well.

so, count on a smart interviewer because if the interviewer is not top notch, you don't want the job? that's throwing your future to the wind.

Another reason I wouldn't not tell the truth is maybe the interviewer knows my ex-colleagues.

It's not about lying, but constructing a narrative that paints the facts in a favorable light. Just saying you were fired for underperforming gives you no room to construct a less negative narrative.

That's what politicians do.

It also shows courage to fess up to getting fired. As long as there's a good story around it, and some learnings, silicon valley is generally forgiving of short tenures.

Being fired lost much of its stigma in highly intellectual professions. Often, it has to do with disagreements over certain business/technical decisions, rather than incompetence.

I have seen great people fired by terrible managers.

As an interviewer, I appreciate the honesty/brevity, and if the explanation for being fired is reasonable enough, it needn't be a huge red flag.