Just like OP, one thing I didn't like about the interviews was the instant and final yes-or-no answer. In our case, YC said they were worried about a problem we did not think would be a serious issue. We did come up with a solution, but only a few hours later, which, apparently, was too late.
one thing I didn't like about the interviews was the instant and final yes-or-no answer
Yes, that is a problem for us too. We'd like to be able to spend longer with each group. But we want to give the maximum number of groups a chance to interview. If we spent more time on each interview, we'd have to interview fewer groups.
YC has a problem. YC has money. Sounds like a business opportunity.
Somebody needs to implement a Questions Requiring Thought (QRT) system. There should be a way to note questions during the interview that would require a lot of thought before a smart answer could be given concisely. Interviewees would leave the interview, put their thoughts together, and make a concise video of their answer. YC could review these answers anytime. I bet for 1.2x the time they're spending now, YC could get 2x the information.
Have you considered drafting some YC alumni into helping you do interviews? I'm imagining a system where applicants would have several interviews with YC alumni and then you'd interview the groups which get the most "yes" votes from your alumni screeners -- I'm guessing that after going through the YC program people get reasonably good at identifying what it takes to be a successful YC participant.
Of course, this would depend on the availability of YC alumni. I know I'd sign up to do it -- if I were a YC alumnus, that is -- but the fact that I spend several hours per week acting as an alumni representative on my alma mater's university senate (and committees thereof) marks me as being unusually prone to volunteer for such things.
