&gt;As I said before, nobody has a right to YC funding. Their money, their choice. They don&#x27;t have to give a logical reason; they don&#x27;t have to give a reason at all. They could choose among applicants by throwing darts, and nobody would have any right to complain.<p>Who is complaining? Obviously YC can do whatever with its money. It doesn&#x27;t even need to be said, let alone, twice.<p>&gt;Of course, choosing by throwing darts wouldn&#x27;t work well, which is why YC doesn&#x27;t do it. But what they do do, including the &quot;Social Radar&quot;, does appear to work well, even if no one can construct a logical argument for why it does.<p>Right, so as far as anyone on the outside can tell, YC operates on a type of magic oracle.<p>&gt;You didn&#x27;t use the word first, but you are treating YC&#x27;s process as though the word was appropriate.<p>My only point here is that the essays describe YC as essentially a magic process. The person I was responding to tried to make an analogy to the &quot;lady of justice&quot;, while simultaneously making a claim to objectivity (in addition to others). My sentences with containing or referring to &quot;lady&quot; (including my comment about punishment) were only in response to that person&#x27;s claims. Those sentences contain no information about what I think about YC&#x27;s process (or rather, it&#x27;s description in this essay).