3 ms·

Now that this has happened, how (if at all) would you revise this comment about Arrington: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2719086 http://news.ycombinator.c

Now that this has happened, how (if at all) would you revise this comment about Arrington: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2719086 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2719086

pg 15y ago
This is the worst thing I personally have seen him do. So he is not looking quite so good to me now. On the other hand, I still don't believe he's deeply evil. His big weakness is the length he'll go to to get information out of people. I think he crossed the line in this case. But I still don't think he's a bad person.
- abrimo 15y ago
  Is this the worst thing you've seen him do because it personally affects you? All the times that you said he was just being harsh, I'm sure the people who were impacted thought he crossed the line as well.
- graymagiker 15y ago
  According to his most recent update http://goo.gl/TBLbf http://goo.gl/TBLbf Michael e-mailed the company first, and then called. Further he claims to have read the comment back to Christopher Lukezic before hanging up. This to me seems to be a perfectly reasonable length to go to for information. Is your contention that this is not what happened? If this is what happened, then I think you owe Michael an apology. He has done an excellent job of updating his article with more information from airbnb's side of things as he got it, and I think that if you misspoke or were misinformed you need to say as much.
- Freeman77 15y ago
  I have read EJ's two posts, two posts here - yours and one by Brian Chesky - and three related posts at TechCrunch including Arrington's response to this post (have you even read it?). I'm not a regular reader of any of these publications or their authors. As an observer without a horse in this race, I don't see where Arrington has done anything wrong. Your second-hand accusation of trying to strong-arm your spokesman for details seems one-sided and self-interested, while his response seems plausible and verifiable. Whatever the truth of this PERSONAL conflict, which by the way is peripheral and inconsequential (except for negative consequences) to the issue of the crisis at Airbnb, you're not doing your professional self or the company any favors by continuing along this line of commentary. Emotions are influencing your behavior in areas where rationality would better suit your situation. Better to quit taking things personally and focus on taking care of the business at hand.

Now that this has happened, how (if at all) would you revise this comment about Arrington: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2719086 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2719086

pg 15y ago

This is the worst thing I personally have seen him do. So he is not looking quite so good to me now. On the other hand, I still don't believe he's deeply evil. His big weakness is the length he'll go to to get information out of people. I think he crossed the line in this case. But I still don't think he's a bad person.

abrimo 15y ago
Is this the worst thing you've seen him do because it personally affects you? All the times that you said he was just being harsh, I'm sure the people who were impacted thought he crossed the line as well.
graymagiker 15y ago
According to his most recent update http://goo.gl/TBLbf http://goo.gl/TBLbf Michael e-mailed the company first, and then called. Further he claims to have read the comment back to Christopher Lukezic before hanging up. This to me seems to be a perfectly reasonable length to go to for information. Is your contention that this is not what happened? If this is what happened, then I think you owe Michael an apology. He has done an excellent job of updating his article with more information from airbnb's side of things as he got it, and I think that if you misspoke or were misinformed you need to say as much.
Freeman77 15y ago
I have read EJ's two posts, two posts here - yours and one by Brian Chesky - and three related posts at TechCrunch including Arrington's response to this post (have you even read it?). I'm not a regular reader of any of these publications or their authors. As an observer without a horse in this race, I don't see where Arrington has done anything wrong. Your second-hand accusation of trying to strong-arm your spokesman for details seems one-sided and self-interested, while his response seems plausible and verifiable. Whatever the truth of this PERSONAL conflict, which by the way is peripheral and inconsequential (except for negative consequences) to the issue of the crisis at Airbnb, you're not doing your professional self or the company any favors by continuing along this line of commentary. Emotions are influencing your behavior in areas where rationality would better suit your situation. Better to quit taking things personally and focus on taking care of the business at hand.