3 ms·
Was there anything wrong with my characterization of what they did? Did I get down voted for using the word shady when fraud should have been used?
by tmaly 10y ago
Was there anything wrong with my characterization of what they did? Did I get down voted for using the word shady when fraud should have been used?
- Naritai 10y agoAttempting to speak for the rest of the group: You sound like the Wells Fargo CEO, who was criticized for using the term 'unethical' for actions that were clearly 'illegal'. That is, he used words for clearly illegal actions that somehow implied that maybe it was ok, maybe not, depending on how you look at it. You did the same thing - took fraudulent actions, admitted that maybe it wasn't the best thing ('shady'), then started talking about what a great company it was and how you are glad it exists. That is definitely underplaying the situation.
- tedmiston 10y agoI upvoted your sinking post because: the point is valid, "growth hacking", and its implications affect large numbers of startups. I'm not sure if the egg allergy point is relevant to this particular news post, but it doesn't necessarily detract either. Personally, I don't see why you were downvoted. We're supposed to up/downvote when comments add/don't add value to the intellectual discussion. Sometimes people seem to vote by whether they agree/disagree with you instead. I think we generate a better discussion when people vote the first way.