This is a small penis defense. No VC will come out and say it is about them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_penis_rule

Calling someone dumb is unprofessional only if the person is not. Otherwise is just impolite. And if we wasted time negotiating with the VC fund he has some opportunity costs.

Paul Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/images/disagr...

I explicitly said I wasn't disagreeing with his point, just pointing out the lack of courtesy that I find endemic in rantings that are posted here. Your posting of the "hierarchy of disagreement", on the other hand, looks like classic middlebrow dismissal.

On yet another hand, courtesy and manners are social inventions of aristocracy that constitute a tone argument, which is pretty low on the PG hierarchy and at any rate is an argument that benefits only the (in this case) VCs.

While I appreciate where you are coming from, I actually prefer the blog post's vernacular when operating in the startup world. Where language is deliberately used as a mask, it's refreshing to hear things presented in the straightforward manner - it does away with the complexity for which there is little time on either side, the entrepreneur's & vc's.

Yeah, I wouldn't want to be one of the VCs that's named in the article.

Maybe the 'dumb vc' thinks you have what it takes to be successful as a person with the right product and that's why he/she wants to talk to you without knowing the product. If he/she reads this article you probably lost a fan.

Maybe he/she honestly just wanted to give good advice, if you think the advice sucks then you are the stupid one to meet 6 times with the VC..

I hate this one-sided professionalism that we're expected to hold where we never tell the truth about ex-employers or scummy ex-business partners. If someone screws people, the world should know.

If I say, "<Venture Capitalist X> had sex with a woman not his wife", then I'm being unprofessional because I'm taking someone's private matter and exposing it to the public, quite possibly maliciously. On the other hand, that's not what we're talking about. If I say, "<Venture Capitalist X> screwed me and damaged my career", I'm helping everyone else out there make better decisions. How is that a bad thing? How is that "unprofessional"? Relevant information should be shared. (It's the embarrassing but less relevant "dirty laundry" that shouldn't be exposed.)

If companies can damage our reputations by, for example, firing us after 3 months because we refused to commit perjury to save an imperiled executive's ass, then I think we should be allowed to fight back. They don't act like they're entitled to protect our reputations, so why do we have to protect theirs?

In OP's case, he's not even naming anyone; just pointing out sub-optimal behaviors.