3 ms·
Ok, so are there any posts by Hunter publicly trashing someone? If not, it must be because he's had uniformly wonderful experiences with everyone with whom he'
by x0x0 11y ago
Ok, so are there any posts by Hunter publicly trashing someone? If not, it must be because he's had uniformly wonderful experiences with everyone with whom he's interacted in the valley!
He also completely ignores power differentials between (often, but not always) connected and/or well-off founders and their (often, but not always) less well-off, less connected, less known reports. For those of us who aren't as plugged in as he is, the stuff that trickles out to the industry news is helpful. eg founders that have a history of treating dev teams like shit, or founders that have walked away with millions while their employees walked away with zero (Kevin Rose, etc.)
- hunterwalk 11y agohi! my problem is with situationally granting anonymity in press articles, not with criticism overall. Although I generally believe people should stand publicly behind their opinions when making specific accusations about other people, pseudonymous systems are very important/valuable for a variety of reasons. Also, while now, later in my career, I'm certainly better connected than I was when I started out, I'd like to think I've behaved consistently in this belief.
- smt88 11y agoThat doesn't really address GP's comments directly. It's never a good career move to trash someone publicly, and it's not fair to call out anonymous sources for protecting themselves from a backlash. As for your complaint, it's certainly true that almost any angle can be supported by a single source. Good journalists can solve this by finding other sources before publishing or verifying in other ways (viewing email histories, for example).