"Let's be serious here - Founders at Work was a list of wonderful interviews with startup founders and its creation was tied directly to her personal relationship with pg.
Sigh To all downvoters - indicate why this is a) demonstrably wrong or b) demonstrably unfair. It is both true and verifiable - don't just downvote me because this disagrees with your world view."
It is ridiculously rude because it implies that she could not possibly be a YC cofounder based on her professional skills and that her book was not a product of any work/insight, just a side benefit of her personal relationship with PG.
I don't think he implies that. Those two things are not contradictory. She could be an outstanding professional AND be there because of her connection. There is nothing wrong with that. It happens all the time, everywhere.
He does. Her personal connection is not relevant unless her professional one depends on it. To point it out as a relevant piece of information implies that the dependency exists.
Sigh To all downvoters - indicate why this is a) demonstrably wrong or b) demonstrably unfair. It is both true and verifiable - don't just downvote me because this disagrees with your world view."
It is ridiculously rude because it implies that she could not possibly be a YC cofounder based on her professional skills and that her book was not a product of any work/insight, just a side benefit of her personal relationship with PG.