1. Allow more than 2000 characters for the application description. I don’t think we need to make this endless - something like 5000 characters should work.
2. Increase the contrast of the text in the description - as a (slightly) older person reading large blocks of light grey text on a light grey background is hard going.
3. Set clear guidelines on what we are supposed to be judging the applications on. Is it what we would most like to see funded, or is it what we think is the best fit for YC?
4. Once a shortlist is selected then let the applicants update the description in light of the discussion they have had. In my case I learned from the questions asked that many people missed what the market was for my idea and dismissed it on that basis. I really needed to go back into the original application and update the description to make this clearer.
5. YC should not limit themselves to the winners of the process. If they see an application they think is a great fit for YC then just interview the applicants. YC is getting a different category of applicants in both cases. In my case I put in an Apply HN application yet I had no interest in applying for a standard YCF or the YC program. Edit. I should add here that I am probably not a good fit for YC, but I am sure some of the other applicants that did not win were.
6. We need some better way of deciding on what is more important - what appeals to the HN community, or what has wider appeal. The HN community is a great resource, but it is not necessarily the best market for a startup. Many of the applications were voted up on what HNers wanted, not on what we thought the wider world wants.