4 ms·
Nick C. I know Mike pretty well too, including your history with him.He is a shithead of the highest order. Just because he put up with your nonsense doesnt mak
by lorenfeldman 16y ago
Nick C. I know Mike pretty well too, including your history with him.He is a shithead of the highest order. Just because he put up with your nonsense doesnt make him special. The article is dead on.
- nikcub 16y agoThis has nothing to do with personalities or personal issues, I am rating him professionally in the scope of being a blogger.
- lorenfeldman 16y agoThats fine. Professionally he's a hack. All insider info from pals. He bullies and tries to scare people. I've seen it many times. Plus its all personal with him. He does hit jobs on companies and people he doesnt like.The guys a wannabee journo. Just another lawyer who hated it.
- aaronblohowiak 16y agoI read more Economist and The Nation than TechCrunch, so I'm not going to address your qualms. However, I was curious about this: "All insider info from pals." -- How else would you get exclusive information?
- nikcub 16y agoThe irony in the OP is that he is a blogger criticizing another blogger for poor quality and his own post is complete shit. A proper critique of Techcrunch would look more like this: Take some real traffic and social network stats Take a sample of stories from 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 years ago and compare volume, subject matter, stories about startups to show a trend in topics covered, etc. Produce a nice graph showing how the # of startup stories has decreased. Overlay it with traffic stats. Show examples of startups that launched without Techcrunch Show examples of other tech conferences, other sources of startup information and how they compare, new upcoming blogs Show examples of stale writing, poor writing, where tech issues were not correct. Do this using quotes and links. Substantiate each one of these points and conclude using all this data that the influence of Techcrunch may not be what is once was, then pontificate what the future may hold. Writing a proper story would require effort - it is a lot easier to take a screenshot from compete, call somebody a dick, submit it to HN and appeal to the masses.
- aristus 16y agoThat is a much, much higher standard than TechCrunch itself seems to use. On one hand you claim inaccuracies are "2%" and acceptable, and that a few phone calls is enough research before going to press. On the other hand you demand a 6-point research project before someone can even begin to criticize TC in turn. Where is your six-point research project backing up why "his own post is complete shit"? I have no opinion either way -- but I believe you're applying very different standards of proof.
- nikcub 16y agohis post was a poor personal attack with zero effort to back up any claims. I outlined one of the ways it could have been a better post.