This most recent case suggests another problem with adding comments to jobs, at least for startups that hadn't launched yet: a few jerks would make a game of trying to out them. Which would mean such startups couldn't be as specific in job posts, lest they give away something that identified them.
I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that people who endeavor to figure out and post the identities of startups who post jobs are jerks. You make a fair point about why they shouldn't do it, and I think you're right to discourage it. Curiosity, however seems like a more probable motivation than malice.
I don't think whether comments are allowed will make a difference when there is suitable mystery/curiosity. The recent case also illustrates this: other posts in this forum or others will be spawned to try to reason an identity out.
A posting anywhere with enough specific info to prompt applicant interest will prompt other observers to fill in the details. It's true for Google, Apple, Facebook etc. – so it will be true for self-identified YC startups who tout their impressive metrics as well.
I posted the thread on asking what the startup was and I certainly didn't mean to be a jerk towards the new company. I was mostly curious because they got so much traction so fast and was willing to learn on how they achieved it. I apologize pg and YC W11 startup.
