Many founding teams that we didn’t invite for interviews wanted to know why they were rejected, because everyone wanted to know how they could do better
That being the case, why didn't we tell everyone the specific reasons? Well, because most of time, there are no particular reasons. A mid-level application is pretty good, and it gets rejected not because it looks bad, but because there are many other excellent applications
Our screening is a selective test, and we only admit a fixed number of applicants at the top of the list, regardless of average level of all applications. In most cases, applicants wonder why they were rejected, perhaps because they take it subconsciously as a general PASS or FAIL exam
Due to our own constraints, we can only interview a certain number of teams. The top 50% of the projects were actually good, and a considerable part of the applicants did not participate in the interview not because they had any obvious shortcomings, but because there were more outstanding applications
Therefore, we cannot reply to emails requesting the reason for rejections, because there is actually no reason in many cases. We can make up a reason for saying no, but the reason would be a lie. The better the team is, more lies we have to make up. The reason why we didn't invite many high-level applications for interviews is not due to themselves. Instead, they were just replaced by the most outstanding teams