Based on the comments here, it looks like we committed a faux pas by using the word rockstar. Sorry about that. We didn't anticipate getting a negative reaction to the word. I had always conceptualized rockstar as a compliment to someone's skills, and I hadn't seen enough job ads to know that it was becoming uncool.
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest you were uncool :)
I certainly wouldn't know if it was cool or not anyway. For all I know, it is the coolest term out there. I just don't like the phraseology. I never have. I don't like guru, ninja, or the other ones either.
Part of what can be annoying about the "rock star" label -- other than that it's a buzzword -- is that it's now a buzzword without a standard definition. At one point it clearly meant "you, o techie, are a recognizable name and thus a brand unto yourself." But in the last few years it's come to mean "miracle worker."
I think you're confounding "nobody is doing what we're doing" with "nobody is competing with us". You're right to say that no competitors sometimes means no market. On the other hand, it's only wise to enter markets where you have some important differentiating factor between your product and the competition.
Look at it this way:
Google had lots of competitors, but nobody was doing what they were doing.
To me, rockstar meant "talented far beyond the norm".
There are lots of articles about what differentiates extremely talented coders from the rest, and taking the intersection of their conclusions paints a relatively fair picture of who we're hoping to have join us. No miracle workers or ego trippers, just somebody who's skilled, hardworking, and nice.
He's legit. He created a new account because people could have figured out the startup from the old one, and they're saving the news of YC funding for the announcement of some new features.
