3 ms·

I agree with the general principle, which I've summed up as: "fail fast" is often a cocktail-party excuse for reckless approaches to management. To the OP: I'm

I agree with the general principle, which I've summed up as: "fail fast" is often a cocktail-party excuse for reckless approaches to management. To the OP: I'm relatively an echo chamber for the other comments here. The article qualifies as tl;dr; and would be much more effective with editing. However, I disagree with others that you go the journalism route; it's a blog, and journalism's standards of "we report, you decide" is about facts, not passion. That will turn some people off, but it won't be ambiguous about your intentions. Keep at it.

michaelochurch 15y ago
"fail fast" is often a cocktail-party excuse for reckless approaches to management. Well said, and there are ethical reasons why this is unacceptable. Tech demos are supposed to be scrappy. Minimum viable product. Twitter put up a fail whale early in its lifespan. So what? I don't think anyone's career relied on it being 100% reliable, and anyone who did bet his career on such a thing was being reckless. Twitter did the right thing by getting something good enough out there and iterating. Management affects too many people for that approach to be tolerable. You have to actually know what you're doing before you act.