Yeh I get the author’s point about choosing a tight niche. In my years I’ve seen many vapid, generic product fails.

Would like a few more specific data-backed examples.

Still universal!

“If you're not a white male, I will reduce my equity stake considerably”

Racism, in whatever form, is distasteful.

Thanks for commenting, Tom. I can't tell if you're making an honest uninformed statement, or a troll and I'm feeding, but I choose the first.

If you're the race (or in this case a group) that's the oppressor (not the oppressed), you're not a victim of racism. Maybe this article will help clarify it: https://metro.co.uk/2020/03/09/can-white-people-experience-r...

Additionally, the reason why I say "white male" instead of just "white people" is because white women are also presented with less opportunities than white males. I'm trying to make this a better opportunity for minorities.

Thanks for the article. I simply disagree that racism is should be defined in terms of historical power structures as the article suggests. Racism - or discrimination on the basis of race - is repellent to me in any form.

Simply put, I don’t want to treat anyone differently on the basis of their skin colour.

Thanks for the explanative answer! I've felt similarly to you before, until I dug deeper into the subject and realized that for white privilege to "disappear", it requires the privileged to do more than just "stop seeing color".

I wish I didn't have to treat anyone differently, but I feel like I should give minorities some benefit, as they have less access to opportunities.

Do you have an idea of how I could convey that without using the "white male" term or language?

For example, you could remove that statement from your site and discuss that during the negotiation. At that time, you don't have to explicitly ask "are you white male?" either. You can do a video meeting and you'll know who they are. Then you can adjust your equity percentage accordingly without even mentioning you are giving them a discount because they are a minority, or you want more equity because they are oppressors. In my opinion, that would be the neutral way to handle this.

Otherwise, I agree with the other comments here that, whether you are favoring minorities or the oppressors, you are still categorizing people in your head and feeding the very concepts we need to pay no attention at all.

Thank you for the suggestion, Emrah! From what I've been exposed to from people in minorities who are actively working towards diversifying the tech space, "paying no attention" is part of the problem of systemic racism, thus requiring an active discrimination against the privileged, in order to try and balance things out.

It's not a comfortable thing to do, because it can feel wrong, indeed.

I would be happy to consider removing that sentence if someone with more experience in this subject explained me it was hurting rather than helping diversification.

Interesting comment.

Would you explain a little more about what you mean by “diversified parts of it” in “you naturally orient to getting exposure to opportunity for diversified parts of it, but when you have a scarcity view, your decisions are necessarily all/nothing”?