27 ms·

There's a big difference as a developer, between knowing all about Twitter, it's platform and APIs, having used Twitter accounts enough --- and worrying about w

by shingen 15y ago

There's a big difference as a developer, between knowing all about Twitter, it's platform and APIs, having used Twitter accounts enough --- and worrying about whether I've got my personal Twitter account up-to-date. I don't have the time to tweet several dozen times per day (what it would really take to learn anything meaningful about me @140 characters a shot). Period. It's not worth the time trade. Should I be tweeting so I can have a couple thousand followers (half of which are literally worthless)? Or should I be throwing that hour a day into my business? I could give you a simple bio that would be far more concise and useful than what you could possibly extract from Twitter postings. And, you don't like wasting your time either: if you have to scan my Twitter posts to compile a picture of me, you're going to waste a huge amount of time I could save you with that simple bio.

fredsters_s 15y ago
I agree with your sentiments, but here's the difference: you could write anything in a bio. And in a CV. That's why socially verifiable information is always preferred. When trying to get an idea of what someone is like, flicking through their Twitter / LinkedIn / HN posts is far more informative and reliable (and quicker) than reading a bunch of prose they wrote about themselves.
- rayhano 15y ago
  But this all mostly a box to be ticked, to verify whether a conversation needs to be had...
- shingen 15y ago
  Obviously you could write anything on a Twitter feed. People embellish the hell out of their LinkedIn profiles, just like they might a resume. I don't believe Twitter qualifies as a valuable form of due diligence for an investor. Should Zuckerberg be worried about what Wall Street thinks of his Twitter account? One post in three years probably implies he just isn't with the times. https://twitter.com/#!/finkd https://twitter.com/#!/finkd It's not looking good for Zuck. You know what's a lot more reliable than me tweeting about Whitney Houston's death? The product I create and show you. Brass tacks. The rest is a superficial sideshow.
  - fredsters_s 15y ago
    Are you equating a cold-calling investment prospect with Mark Zuckerberg? I don't believe Twitter qualifies as a valuable form of due diligence for an investor No disrespect, but you're belief is incorrect. Anything and everything about you online is used when doing DD. Of course, if your product is fucking awesome, then the fact that your Twitter stream is empty is irrelevant. But if your product is fucking awesome, you aren't cold-calling VCs. VCs are cold-calling you.
    - tatsuke95 15y ago
      >"Anything and everything about you online is used when doing DD." Having what, for all intents and purposes, is an employer judge - or worse yet misjudge- me based on my interests, or the articles I read is precisely the reason I'm moving away the merger of my online/offline lives. I recently put my money where my mouth is and deleted my Facebook account. >"However, at the seed stage you're investing in people" This always sounds like horseshit to me. Can some one point to some good examples where this model has been truly successful? Why aren't VCs actively recruiting college campuses, then? It seems like you're missing out on a huge chunk of great candidates if you're always selecting "people" from a small subset who are seeking funding for their (possibly terrible) technology startup.
      - fredsters_s 15y ago
        To see some good examples where this model has been truly successful, see every successful VC fund and accelerator (especially YC), ever. Also, I totally agree re prospective employers, from an employee's POV. But don't make the mistake of conflating Investors with Employers. The two are very different beasts, looking for very different attributes.
        tatsuke95 15y ago
        >"To see some good examples where this model has been truly successful, see every successful VC fund and accelerator (especially YC), ever" I don't know everything about these incubators, but are you telling me that these guys and gals apply and get into the programs without an idea for a startup? That isn't how I thought it worked. I think that's how people like to think or claim it works. But I'm not sure it's the reality. And, if I tried hard, I could probably come up with an example or two where the opposite happened: VCs banked on the talent behind a company with a not-so-good idea, and it "failed".

by shingen 15y ago

fredsters_s 15y ago

I agree with your sentiments, but here's the difference: you could write anything in a bio. And in a CV. That's why socially verifiable information is always preferred. When trying to get an idea of what someone is like, flicking through their Twitter / LinkedIn / HN posts is far more informative and reliable (and quicker) than reading a bunch of prose they wrote about themselves.

rayhano 15y ago
But this all mostly a box to be ticked, to verify whether a conversation needs to be had...
shingen 15y ago
Obviously you could write anything on a Twitter feed. People embellish the hell out of their LinkedIn profiles, just like they might a resume. I don't believe Twitter qualifies as a valuable form of due diligence for an investor. Should Zuckerberg be worried about what Wall Street thinks of his Twitter account? One post in three years probably implies he just isn't with the times. https://twitter.com/#!/finkd https://twitter.com/#!/finkd It's not looking good for Zuck. You know what's a lot more reliable than me tweeting about Whitney Houston's death? The product I create and show you. Brass tacks. The rest is a superficial sideshow.
- fredsters_s 15y ago
  Are you equating a cold-calling investment prospect with Mark Zuckerberg? I don't believe Twitter qualifies as a valuable form of due diligence for an investor No disrespect, but you're belief is incorrect. Anything and everything about you online is used when doing DD. Of course, if your product is fucking awesome, then the fact that your Twitter stream is empty is irrelevant. But if your product is fucking awesome, you aren't cold-calling VCs. VCs are cold-calling you.
  - tatsuke95 15y ago
    >"Anything and everything about you online is used when doing DD." Having what, for all intents and purposes, is an employer judge - or worse yet misjudge- me based on my interests, or the articles I read is precisely the reason I'm moving away the merger of my online/offline lives. I recently put my money where my mouth is and deleted my Facebook account. >"However, at the seed stage you're investing in people" This always sounds like horseshit to me. Can some one point to some good examples where this model has been truly successful? Why aren't VCs actively recruiting college campuses, then? It seems like you're missing out on a huge chunk of great candidates if you're always selecting "people" from a small subset who are seeking funding for their (possibly terrible) technology startup.
    - fredsters_s 15y ago
      To see some good examples where this model has been truly successful, see every successful VC fund and accelerator (especially YC), ever. Also, I totally agree re prospective employers, from an employee's POV. But don't make the mistake of conflating Investors with Employers. The two are very different beasts, looking for very different attributes.
      - tatsuke95 15y ago
        >"To see some good examples where this model has been truly successful, see every successful VC fund and accelerator (especially YC), ever" I don't know everything about these incubators, but are you telling me that these guys and gals apply and get into the programs without an idea for a startup? That isn't how I thought it worked. I think that's how people like to think or claim it works. But I'm not sure it's the reality. And, if I tried hard, I could probably come up with an example or two where the opposite happened: VCs banked on the talent behind a company with a not-so-good idea, and it "failed".