It's well known a16z guys will immediate ban anyone on Twitter the moment for ... anything. I am not talking of trolling, abuse -- just polite disagreement, instant ban. Never seen any other organization doing similar and so consistently.

How a16z manages their social media doesn't seem very relevant to founders who are deciding on VCs. Could you clarify if you disagree?

It's their founders personal account that blocks everyone and I am reasonable sure it's a personality trait.

Andreesen blocked me, a little nobody, when I had a different opinion than him when he was supporting an argument for an investment in some kind of app targeted at young people in Southeast Asia. The app was supposed to aid them in their entrepreneurial endeavors (or somethign like that). His comment was something along the lines that the app would be highly utilized because just about every young person in Southeast Asia is entrepreneurial. I commented that that's not what I see in Thailand where everywhere I go I see nothing but kids making silly conversation and sharing selfies. He called me a racist and blocked me, which was particularly amusing because my son is one of those kids. So could I be racist toward my own son?

I do not even know why Andreessen and Benedict Evans blocked me but they both did. I can't find now because the last pmarca tweet I replied to has been deleted. Perhaps I wasn't the only one who disagreed there :) ?

But having no qualms to spout colonialist bullshit, when a country does something that he doesn't like[1]

Especially ironic considering that it was geared towards India's decision to ban Facebook's "free internet". A decision, which looks in hindsight, extremely smart.

[1] https://money.cnn.com/2016/02/10/technology/marc-andreessen-...

edit : clarify

Sounds like he may have insecurity and anger issues, not being able to process/let emotion settle and has to take some sort of action to 'protect' himself from what he perceives as too strong of a potential trigger. That certainly will make a person fragile, also may lead them to be hyper-confident in their beliefs, perception of passion and confidence is attractive to many people who don't analyze situations deeply.

It seems to me to be more that a16z just wants to squelch anything that doesn't support their agenda. They are always talking up their latest startup no matter how flimsy it may be. Anything critical said about the regard as hate speech. A place like Hacker News is anathema to them since people here are more often critical and less often buy the hype. Which is why they call it Hater News.

Hmm. I'm at my second a16z funded startup and they have been tremendously helpful at both. Their briefing program is unique and genuinely helpful, and the firm has been very useful with introductions and helping find executive hires. I'm sure there are founders who haven't had good experiences with them; but I know a ton who have.

How specifically were the partners combative? What kind of decisions were they pushing against founders' wishes?

can you elaborate? my experience has been fairly good so far, pretty insightful people