> I find it a little bit troublesome that the group that follows 'hacker' news is so willingly supportive of blatant technical misinformation. I don't think an

> I find it a little bit troublesome that the group that follows 'hacker' news is so willingly supportive of blatant technical misinformation. I don't think anyone here is saying that W3Schools is tits, or that it disseminates valid tutorials or code. I'm a little confused as to why W3Schools is being singled out among many crap tutorial sites. I know that you claim Google placement and bullshit certifications are your driving reasons, but I have a little trouble believing that. The Internet is organic, and the very fact that W3Schools still exists today is more of an indicator that nothing better exists. W3Fools isn't webstandards.org and you're not Zeldman. You've possibly wasted your time creating a site that ridicules rather than one that educates. Your site begs for applause from the knowing and shows up dead last for a user looking for quick tutorials. > I'm not sure the last time you built a website to scale and to the breadth of information that's found on w3schools (valid or not), but it takes a hell of a lot longer than a week. Most everyone would agree with that, but you gave yourself your own deadline, no? Who said W3Fools had to launch at a specific date? And why? W3Fools could have been called HitTheGroundRunning.org and started off with CSS3 or HTML5 tutorials. A month or so in and you'd have a real thoughtful and useful resource. Then scaled up based on user feedback.