4 ms·

> 1. Dodged a bullet I'd argue that Codecademy dodged a bullet. Calling them out by name is in really bad taste IMO. Let's be honest: if he had launched a cod

> 1. Dodged a bullet I'd argue that Codecademy dodged a bullet. Calling them out by name is in really bad taste IMO. Let's be honest: if he had launched a coding tutorial website thing and it didn't have the "comeback story" marketing narrative then no one would care.

jgwil2 5y ago
If it's so easy to build a coding tutorial website, then what advantage does Codecademy have beyond name recognition? So you're not competing with their tech, you're competing with their marketing. You say bad taste, I say good marketing.
- splistud 5y ago
  Content? Seems like a good advantage to have for a tutorial website.
- 0xFACEFEED 5y ago
  I don't think it's objectively good marketing. But then I guess it depends on what your philosophical stance is on "succès de scandale" (a logical extreme; there isn't much controversy here). My stance on the ethics of marketing is that "anything goes" until you start tarnishing the names of others to get ahead. This is why trash talking past employers/coworkers has always been an insta-no-hire in my book for example. Now I don't know to overstate what this guy did. Obviously he's not outright trash talking here. But I think once you form a company and start marketing then you should be held to some ethical standard. If you mention other people or companies by name then consider how what you're saying could be perceived.
ironmagma 5y ago
What kind of harm does this actually do to Codecademy? I would argue none. There is no downside to calling them out.
- 0xFACEFEED 5y ago
  Just look at the comment above mine: "booo on any company that". Some people will perceive his rejection as bad hiring practices on Codecademy's part. Every comeback story needs a bad guy that rejects or pushes down the hero before they rise. That's what makes this post interesting. It's certainly not the content; creating a web app of stitched together NPM packages isn't exactly a major challenge these days. Especially if you're copying something else feature-by-feature.
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    > Some people will perceive his rejection as bad hiring practices on Codecademy's part. FTR, I have no opinion for or against Codecademy. Whether it's a bad or good hiring practice depends on what you think of this guy. The information on whether any company hires or rejects a certain applicant is not a trade secret. If you read this and think, "this guy's a douchebag," then yes, the company looks sane and reasonable, the opposite of bad. If you read it and think, "this guy is perfectly reasonable," then yes, the company looks bad. This poster isn't saying anything about whether Codecademy is good or bad, they're just stating the facts, which were created as a result of the company's hiring decisions. If the facts make them look bad, that's on the company for making the choices they did. If they make them look good, the same applies. Again, I have no horse in this race.
    - 0xFACEFEED 5y ago
      > they're just stating the facts They're stating their projected version of the facts. It's the narrative as they see it. Important details could be missing. Suppose you and I made a few attempts to start a company together and it didn't work out. Then I went off on my own as a solo founder and got seed funding. Then imagine I made a blog post titled "I tried to start a company with ironmagma 3 times and failed, so I became a solo founder instead and succeeded". > Again, I have no horse in this race. There's no race? Just commentary. It's an interesting discussion IMO.
      - ironmagma 5y ago
notsureaboutpg 5y ago
Huge disagree. Companies call each other out by name all the time. Why can't he build his personal brand by calling CodeAcademy out by name but they can do so with their corporate brand?

jgwil2 5y ago

If it's so easy to build a coding tutorial website, then what advantage does Codecademy have beyond name recognition? So you're not competing with their tech, you're competing with their marketing. You say bad taste, I say good marketing.

splistud 5y ago
Content? Seems like a good advantage to have for a tutorial website.
0xFACEFEED 5y ago
I don't think it's objectively good marketing. But then I guess it depends on what your philosophical stance is on "succès de scandale" (a logical extreme; there isn't much controversy here). My stance on the ethics of marketing is that "anything goes" until you start tarnishing the names of others to get ahead. This is why trash talking past employers/coworkers has always been an insta-no-hire in my book for example. Now I don't know to overstate what this guy did. Obviously he's not outright trash talking here. But I think once you form a company and start marketing then you should be held to some ethical standard. If you mention other people or companies by name then consider how what you're saying could be perceived.

ironmagma 5y ago

What kind of harm does this actually do to Codecademy? I would argue none. There is no downside to calling them out.

0xFACEFEED 5y ago
Just look at the comment above mine: "booo on any company that". Some people will perceive his rejection as bad hiring practices on Codecademy's part. Every comeback story needs a bad guy that rejects or pushes down the hero before they rise. That's what makes this post interesting. It's certainly not the content; creating a web app of stitched together NPM packages isn't exactly a major challenge these days. Especially if you're copying something else feature-by-feature.
- ironmagma 5y ago
  > Some people will perceive his rejection as bad hiring practices on Codecademy's part. FTR, I have no opinion for or against Codecademy. Whether it's a bad or good hiring practice depends on what you think of this guy. The information on whether any company hires or rejects a certain applicant is not a trade secret. If you read this and think, "this guy's a douchebag," then yes, the company looks sane and reasonable, the opposite of bad. If you read it and think, "this guy is perfectly reasonable," then yes, the company looks bad. This poster isn't saying anything about whether Codecademy is good or bad, they're just stating the facts, which were created as a result of the company's hiring decisions. If the facts make them look bad, that's on the company for making the choices they did. If they make them look good, the same applies. Again, I have no horse in this race.
  - 0xFACEFEED 5y ago
    > they're just stating the facts They're stating their projected version of the facts. It's the narrative as they see it. Important details could be missing. Suppose you and I made a few attempts to start a company together and it didn't work out. Then I went off on my own as a solo founder and got seed funding. Then imagine I made a blog post titled "I tried to start a company with ironmagma 3 times and failed, so I became a solo founder instead and succeeded". > Again, I have no horse in this race. There's no race? Just commentary. It's an interesting discussion IMO.
    - ironmagma 5y ago

notsureaboutpg 5y ago

Huge disagree. Companies call each other out by name all the time. Why can't he build his personal brand by calling CodeAcademy out by name but they can do so with their corporate brand?