The article is terribly condescending towards Reddit's founders and moderators. They have created and grown it to be in the top 10 of US websites. The site is s

The article is terribly condescending towards Reddit's founders and moderators. They have created and grown it to be in the top 10 of US websites. The site is still growing very strongly. Yet they're presented as an immature bunch who have no idea what they're doing and need "adult" supervision, e.g. > Those cats can't run anything > in retrospect, one flaw with [Condé Nast]’s hands-off approach was an assumption that Reddit’s founders would know when and how to ask for help. [...] Looking back [...] more hand-holding would have been a good idea. Articles like this are a barely veiled attempt to put pressure on Condé Nast and the other owners - Reddit needs to be instilled with a corporate, PR-oriented mentality ASAP. Its spirit of "open discourse and peer-to-peer learning" is incomprehensible to corporate America. On the other hand, the impressive user base seems ripe for more aggressive monetization. So the old deal has become inconvenient: > During the courtship of Reddit [...] the company promised that if the deal went through, it would leave the founders alone to run the site with minimal interference