3 ms·
Your points only emphasize that this is a personal contrariness, that puts others/us in the middle for no reason, using Calacanis any kind of company tactics fr
by volida 17y ago
Your points only emphasize that this is a personal contrariness, that puts others/us in the middle for no reason, using Calacanis any kind of company tactics from the author's point of view, as an edge to make a public issue.
old-fashion publicity trick
- bonsaitree 17y agoI fail to see how there's a "middle" here at all. We're both participants in a public online discussion regarding the behavior of the CEO of a company which, at least for me, I can say I have no legal vested interest or direct financial dealings. Fundamentally, this is between Mr. Calacanis, the management of Mahalo, and Google. We're both mere spectators. By replying personally, Mr. Calacanis chose to make this a personal public issue--in both the original article & this forum. That's entirely within his purview. I'm sure he's experienced enough to know the potential ramifications of those actions.
- volida 17y agoThat's exactly the issue. The dispute if any should be between the interested parties. How do you consider yourself not caught in the "middle" when you potentially change your view about someone based on one source?
- aaronwall 17y agoWas that Jason's approach when he flamed Squidoo publicly over and over again in the media until he got their site penalized by Google? Guess not, eh. And keep in mind Squidoo was not automating and scraping on the scale that Mahalo is today. So Mahalo is far worse.