I wonder how the YC guys feel about the abundance of "how to get accepted to YC" articles. Just as you can prepare for the SAT you can now prepare for the YC tests -- there are a lot of examples of accepted applications, videos, thoughts from founders, etc. just like this very submission. The point is, there is probably less differentiation in the new pool of applicants in terms of their submission applications which makes YC's job more difficult. My theory is that now they're going to place more importantance on filters like past work experience (I've noticed a considerable amount of acceptees having ex-Googlers in their teams) and academic pedigree (I've noticed a high amount of acceptees having big-name school people in their teams).
Such articles can be good. It depends on their focus. It wouldn't be good if people wrote articles talking about how to trick us. But if they tell applicants how to avoid mistakes that will make it harder for us to appreciate them, that's great.
I share your concerns -- I don't want YC to get inundated with masquerading applications.
However, while you can prepare for the SAT, those scores alone are insufficient to guarantee you admission into top universities. You need something unique. In the case of YC, this will be either team, traction, or idea. It's pretty hard to fake a history of making (or pedigree), numbers, and wild ideas.
Although I can't speak for YC, I can provide some info from the applicant side, specifically those outside the existing community.As an Aussie putting in an application for W13 we're geographically and somewhat ideologically separated.
We've spent the last 3 months getting to beta and reading these articles is what's spurred our interest to apply. For those outside the immediate community, it's a great bridge, plus what zeckalpha said!
I doubt any of these articles make or break an application. They're just good publicity, for both YC (for appearing difficult to get in) and the author(s).
