4 ms·

I, for one, flagged the article because I felt: - the author was trolling - the post was misleading

by wooster 16y ago

petewarden 16y ago
Flagging is a pretty drastic response to a post you disagree with. Andrew's article was certainly pretty blistering, but he had an argument backed up with evidence. Saying a post is misleading but offering nothing to back that up is unhelpful to say the least. There was an active and civil comments thread that seems like the perfect venue to have a more enlightening discussion.
- studer 16y ago
  What argument? Posterous has never claimed that Tumblr was dying, so the whole post was based on a false premise. Go read their original post again if you don't believe me (or read my post in the deleted thread, where I quote the relevant parts).
- wooster 16y ago
  From Andrew's post: But I have some beef here Preposterous staff, you call all your competitors, who are all building products to serve similar communities, dying? Incorrect. This is a deliberate misreading of the original post ( http://blog.posterous.com/make-the-switch-to-posterous http://blog.posterous.com/make-the-switch-to-posterous ) which states: You grouched about dying platforms that haven't added new features in ages, sites that have made it too complex to perform the most basic tasks and places that smother your content in ads. Again from Andrew's post: Threats of lawsuits are reported, and to me this isn’t about the tools or privacy, it is about a company being a dick and the legal response to just that. There are many possible interpretations of the situation, but companies generally don't bring out the lawyers because another company is "being a dick". Again from Andrew's post: Saying switching to your service is fine, but by discrediting them, both the community behind them and the staff, you are also attacking the full history of the site, which, a lot of people care about. I don't see him backing this up anywhere in the post. He makes a big leap from Posterous lacking "community" features and saying some of the platforms they're writing exporters for are dying, to "discrediting" the communities behind sites and "attacking" the full history of those sites. Then, there's the repeated use of the derogatory "Preposterous", which is roughly equivalent to the old "Windoze" or "Crapintosh". So, again, in my opinion: - the post was trolling - the post is misleading The trolling alone was enough for me to flag the post.
klochner 16y ago
Isn't the entire Posterous switch campaign something of an exercise in trolling? I found the thread interesting, even though I like and use Posterous.
chc 16y ago
Did you honestly feel that it was any more so than the Posterous "Tumblr is dying — come over here" post that inspired it? I felt the article in question was significantly less trollish or misleading.
- studer 16y ago
  Can you link to the post where they claimed that? In the one I read, they said that Tumblr was a pretty cool site. Not a single word about the size of the user bases. So which post did you read?
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

I, for one, flagged the article because I felt: - the author was trolling - the post was misleading

by wooster 16y ago

I, for one, flagged the article because I felt: - the author was trolling - the post was misleading

Flagging is a pretty drastic response to a post you disagree with. Andrew's article was certainly pretty blistering, but he had an argument backed up with evidence. Saying a post is misleading but offering nothing to back that up is unhelpful to say the least. There was an active and civil comments thread that seems like the perfect venue to have a more enlightening discussion.

studer 16y ago
What argument? Posterous has never claimed that Tumblr was dying, so the whole post was based on a false premise. Go read their original post again if you don't believe me (or read my post in the deleted thread, where I quote the relevant parts).
wooster 16y ago
From Andrew's post: But I have some beef here Preposterous staff, you call all your competitors, who are all building products to serve similar communities, dying? Incorrect. This is a deliberate misreading of the original post ( http://blog.posterous.com/make-the-switch-to-posterous http://blog.posterous.com/make-the-switch-to-posterous ) which states: You grouched about dying platforms that haven't added new features in ages, sites that have made it too complex to perform the most basic tasks and places that smother your content in ads. Again from Andrew's post: Threats of lawsuits are reported, and to me this isn’t about the tools or privacy, it is about a company being a dick and the legal response to just that. There are many possible interpretations of the situation, but companies generally don't bring out the lawyers because another company is "being a dick". Again from Andrew's post: Saying switching to your service is fine, but by discrediting them, both the community behind them and the staff, you are also attacking the full history of the site, which, a lot of people care about. I don't see him backing this up anywhere in the post. He makes a big leap from Posterous lacking "community" features and saying some of the platforms they're writing exporters for are dying, to "discrediting" the communities behind sites and "attacking" the full history of those sites. Then, there's the repeated use of the derogatory "Preposterous", which is roughly equivalent to the old "Windoze" or "Crapintosh". So, again, in my opinion: - the post was trolling - the post is misleading The trolling alone was enough for me to flag the post.

klochner 16y ago

Isn't the entire Posterous switch campaign something of an exercise in trolling? I found the thread interesting, even though I like and use Posterous.

chc 16y ago

Did you honestly feel that it was any more so than the Posterous "Tumblr is dying — come over here" post that inspired it? I felt the article in question was significantly less trollish or misleading.

studer 16y ago
Can you link to the post where they claimed that? In the one I read, they said that Tumblr was a pretty cool site. Not a single word about the size of the user bases. So which post did you read?

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]