This might be a new policy now that you're the head moderator, but the reason this complaint pops up every time there's a negative post about a YC company is because for several years there was a noticeable, nearly 100% correlation between "negative post about a YC company" and "gone from the front page within 3 hours despite dozens or even hundreds of upvotes."
It isn't a new policy; as I've posted elsewhere in the thread, "moderate HN less, not more, when YC or a YC startup is involved" is literally the first thing pg taught me about how to moderate HN. In fact he blurted it at me before I even had a chance to grab a chair.
I doubt these complaints pop up because of years ago, though. People just assume that's how it works whether it does that way or not, and confirmation bias does the rest, i.e. we notice the data points that match our assumptions much more than ones that don't. Plus it's fun to trade those with others who share the same view.
Dan has been the head moderator for years, and was a moderator long before it was public that he was. PG was more capricious with moderation than Dan was, but when Dan says Paul Graham believed not showing favoritism to YC was a priority of his, I believe him.
Say what you want about anybody else at YC, but Dan is one of the most trustworthy people in show business. If he says a story didn't get suppressed by the mods, bank on that.
>If he says a story didn't get suppressed by the mods, bank on that. //
I don't really doubt you tptacek, nor indeed doubt dang, but this is a problem with closed moderation we can't see whether YC manipulates the rankings to their benefit financially or otherwise and for those people who don't know you or dang personally there's little provable trust to be carried by such comments as you've made here.
