Science is a repeatable act. Art is usually a destination with many paths. In that respect, startups are more like art than science. Entrepreneurs try to learn from prior mistakes (theirs and those of their prior employers) and try to double down on what they know to work. When entrepreneurs go over to the other side of the table, they do the same. Avoid negative things and pursue that which returns profit. Most investors therefore end up pattern matching. They pattern match against ideas (thus preferring consumer over enterprise, early stage over growth stage, and vice versa/so on) and teams (top CS schools, past success) and relationships (warm intros from entrepreneurs who have made them money). So when I hear about people getting angry or crestfallen about being rejected from YC, or being turned down by VC's or angels, I want to grab them by the shoulders and shake them vigorously. Because investors make bets on what they've seen, and everyone has limited experience. So the most direct reaction is to be offended in some way, and to take it as a signal that your idea sucks, or maybe your team is terrible. While those might be true, the larger factor is usually that you don't match their pattern recognizer. So change to fit the pattern, or find other ways to make it work. Because lightning does strike the same place, but never takes exact same path to get there.