The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Sam Lessin argument clarity score 4.0/5 from 10 exchanges on raw tape · average scores: directness 4 · coherence 3.9 · precision 3.7 · compression 3.4 record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
34exchanges match
10on raw tape
4redirected or not addressed
Not addressed produced feed D 2 · C 3 · P 3 · Cm 2 2.55

Q Aren't you in the business of making as much money for your investors as possible?

A There's another real debate, I think, which is, which is a tough one, which is, look, I would argue that there's a strong case to be made that as a venture capitalist, you should not have an opinion about the public markets. Right. That like, you're not paid to have an opinion about public markets. People have their own opinions about public markets. Right. And like you're paid, your job is to, to manage the private markets or private pricing. And then once things public, it's like, look, that's, you know, the game should be over now. There's all sorts of people that juice that, or like decide they do have opinions about the public markets, but like, I don't know, it's something I've gone back and forth on, to be totally honest with you about whether VCs just thematically shooting that, or whether you say, look, you know, we can turn over shares. You guys figure out what to do. Right.

AI assessment note: “There's another real debate, I think, which is, which is a tough one”

Redirected raw tape D 2 · C 3 · P 2 · Cm 2 2.30

Q do want to touch on staying on the bots here. And, you know, there's one problem with bots is they don't have the ability to occupy the same kind of screen real estate, if that's a thing, uh, that apps do now. So how do you, how do you think, and how do you at Finn plan to establish that same relationship and trust with the user and the stickiness?

A Yeah. I mean, the, the, the story of apps, Right. Ultimately has been a story of engagement. It's been about the competition for the home screen about nothing else, right? The long tail of apps has mostly failed, right? The, the real estate and time and attention has been taken up by a few head application publishers. You know, bots are not going to have, I mean, again, you can think of all of a sudden chat as the OS, right? Which people like to talk about and therefore maybe there's going to end up in different forms of your buddy list and your buddy list is just a different form of a home screen, right? So you can kind of do the one for one translation and say, okay, who's going to wind up is the services that sit inside the home screen, um, at the top of it, who's going to get all the attention. But I mean, the thing that gets me excited, honestly, is I think engagement driven businesses are wonderful. Um, they can be great. Um, they're great businesses. Again, you know, there are missions like helping people communicate and collaborate, which are highly driven by attention driven models, uh, and engagement driven models. But there's a lot of businesses that aren't like, I think the reason, um, I personally believe the internet has mostly failed in its mission to become an information platform. Um, it's a great content platform. It's super engaging, but it doesn't inform the…

AI assessment note: “I'm not saying that bots solve the business model problems”

Redirected raw tape D 2 · C 2 · P 3 · Cm 2 2.25

Q do want to touch on staying on the bots here. And, you know, there's one problem with bots is they don't have the ability to occupy the same kind of screen real estate, if that's a thing, uh, that apps do now. So how do you, how do you think, and how do you at Finn plan to establish that same relationship and trust with the user and the stickiness?

A Yeah. I mean, the, the, the story of apps, Right. Ultimately has been a story of engagement. It's been about the competition for the home screen about nothing else, right? The long tail of apps has mostly failed, right? The, the real estate and time and attention has been taken up by a few head application publishers. You know, bots are not going to have, I mean, again, you can think of all of a sudden chat as the OS, right? Which people like to talk about and therefore maybe there's going to end up in different forms of your buddy list and your buddy list is just a different form of a home screen, right? So you can kind of do the one for one translation and say, okay, who's going to wind up is the services that sit inside the home screen, um, at the top of it, who's going to get all the attention. But I mean, the thing that gets me excited, honestly, is I think engagement driven businesses are wonderful. Um, they can be great. Um, they're great businesses. Again, you know, there are missions like helping people communicate and collaborate, which are highly driven by attention driven models, uh, and engagement driven models. But there's a lot of businesses that aren't like, I think the reason, um, I personally believe the internet has mostly failed in its mission to become an information platform. Um, it's a great content platform. It's super engaging, but it doesn't inform the…

AI assessment note: “I personally believe the internet has mostly failed in its mission”

Redirected produced feed D 1 · C 3 · P 2 · Cm 2 2.00

Q Aren't you in the business of making as much money for your investors as possible?

A There's another real debate, I think, which is, which is a tough one, which is, look, I would argue that there's a strong case to be made that as a venture capitalist, you should not have an opinion about the public markets. Right. That like, you're not paid to have an opinion about public markets. People have their own opinions about public markets. Right. And like you're paid, your job is to, to manage the private markets or private pricing. And then once things public, it's like, look, that's, you know, the game should be over now. There's all sorts of people that juice that, or like decide they do have opinions about the public markets, but like, I don't know, it's something I've gone back and forth on, to be totally honest with you about whether VCs just thematically shooting that, or whether you say, look, you know, we can turn over shares. You guys figure out what to do. Right.

AI assessment note: “There's another real debate, I think, which is, which is a tough one”

← previous page 2
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 1,200 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.