6 ms·

How can anyone believe this will hold true? Especially coming from the founders of Posterous who sold out and then shuttered their service? Was Posterous creat

by jbail 14y ago

How can anyone believe this will hold true? Especially coming from the founders of Posterous who sold out and then shuttered their service? Was Posterous created to not be sustainable? If so, then Posterous's users were duped from the get go into using something that the founders knew wasn't sustainable and would eventually disappear. That's not a good way to treat users and it surely doesn't inspire confidence in the founders' next projects. Honestly, I find pitching this service on the day of the news that Posterous is shutting down to be kind of tacky. I'm not trolling or trying to be negative...I'm just suspicious of why anyone should trust this.

jmathai 14y ago
The only exchange I've had with one of the founders (Garry) was on Twitter when a YC company named SnapJoy launched a campaign to "free your photos" from Flickr. The only problem was that SnapJoy was a bigger black hole than Flickr was. An API to access your photos was coming soon for months and never came before they were acquired by Dropbox. Somehow he was arguing around that point. Unsure how but it couldn't possibly have made sense. I have nothing against Garry or anyone else involved in these projects/companies but it goes a long way to hurt those of us [1] trying to build software where users actually control and retain ownership of their data. [1] I founded The OpenPhoto Project in 2011 https://github.com/photo https://github.com/photo http://theopenphotoproject.org http://theopenphotoproject.org
garry 14y ago
When I started working on Posterous in 2008, I intended to work on it forever. It didn't work out that way, and I left in January of 2011. It was a venture-funded company by then and we were committed to super-growth, not sustainability. We never started charging for the product. Posthaven is the result of my experience with that. I know the world needs a simple, clean, well-lit, easy place to post. One that doesn't force us to make the same kind of product decisions that we had to before. I promise you we are focused on making this a long term project. It's not a startup and Brett and I are committed to making it work over the long haul.
- 8ig8 14y ago
  What about making this a non-profit, run by a board? Different idea, but, for example Matt M. created the WordPress Foundation to independently carry out the things he believed in. http://wordpressfoundation.org/ http://wordpressfoundation.org/
  - garry 14y ago
    Yes. I love this idea. Right now I have to focus on coding, but this will be necessary down the road.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - prawn 14y ago
      Might help in the event that something happens to both of you and users are left on a ghost ship of sorts.
  - ingve 14y ago
    Apparently, that "independent" WordPress Foundation is still just Matt: "From an ultimate decision-making point of view, the Foundation is mainly just me. [...] It’s worth noting that the Foundation was created purely to be a trademark and IP holding entity that Automattic could transfer its ownership of the WordPress trademark to. There are no “members.”" [0] [0] http://wpkrauts.com/2013/leaders-and-the-greater-good/#comment-881 http://wpkrauts.com/2013/leaders-and-the-greater-good/#comme...
    - rickcolosimo 14y ago
      Without digging into the specifics of the matter,if the Foundation is indeed a 501(c)(3), the IRS should/will almost certainly have required it to have three independent board members. In addition, having counseled clients on this structure, the benefit of creating a nonprofit and giving it IP is that it creates a public check on anything to do with that IP. For example, while a startup's founders can sell the company, they can't unilaterally agree to sell off the IP in the nonprofit, and the public can challenge any such sales by recourse to a state attorney general's office. It's not perfect, but it helps protect the IP in the way founders want to. In many ways, it's a one-way decision, which is why it works. (Yes, IAAL.)
qeorge 14y ago
the founders of Posterous who sold out and then shuttered their service Seriously? Just gonna throw 'em under the bus like that? Friends like these.. Its time to stop trotting out this meme that the alternative to an "aquihire" was a sustainable business. Sometimes you've got to fish or cut bait. Ad hominem aside, trust should never be required for a good agreement. PostHaven has made a great start by killing any acquisition value from Day 1 by making their defining feature a promise never to sell. If they follow that up with e.g., transferring control of posthaven.com to a well-regarded foundation like Wikimedia, the EFF, or archive.org they could further remove the trust requirement from the contract they are forming with their users. That'd be great.
- jbail 14y ago
  There's nothing wrong with selling out. I assume Posterous was founded to make a profit at some point and selling out allowed them to do that. I'm actually 100% okay with that. I was merely calling out that "never selling out" is a strange proposal coming from someone with a track record for selling out...on the day that this former sold out service announces it is shutting down forever. It might just be bad timing to announce the next project more than anything.
  - callmevlad 14y ago
    According to Garry [1], they had no idea that Twitter would make the announcement today, so the bad timing seems coincidental. [1] https://twitter.com/garrytan/status/302558780447682560 https://twitter.com/garrytan/status/302558780447682560
- shrikant 14y ago
  > PostHaven has made a great start by killing any acquisition value from Day 1 by making their defining feature a promise never to sell. Just like OkCupid's intensive, well-researched, data-driven post on why online dating needs to be free scared off Match.com from acquiring them?
  - tedunangst 14y ago
marginalboy 14y ago
I don't think you're being very fair. You're suggesting a false dichotomy.
sfard 14y ago
For those interested, I built http://throwww.com http://throwww.com which is a free (and with an obvious bias) better alternative.
- cuchi_costa 14y ago
  Hey sfard, how do i reach you?

by jbail 14y ago

jmathai 14y ago

The only exchange I've had with one of the founders (Garry) was on Twitter when a YC company named SnapJoy launched a campaign to "free your photos" from Flickr. The only problem was that SnapJoy was a bigger black hole than Flickr was. An API to access your photos was coming soon for months and never came before they were acquired by Dropbox. Somehow he was arguing around that point. Unsure how but it couldn't possibly have made sense. I have nothing against Garry or anyone else involved in these projects/companies but it goes a long way to hurt those of us [1] trying to build software where users actually control and retain ownership of their data. [1] I founded The OpenPhoto Project in 2011 https://github.com/photo https://github.com/photo http://theopenphotoproject.org http://theopenphotoproject.org

garry 14y ago

When I started working on Posterous in 2008, I intended to work on it forever. It didn't work out that way, and I left in January of 2011. It was a venture-funded company by then and we were committed to super-growth, not sustainability. We never started charging for the product. Posthaven is the result of my experience with that. I know the world needs a simple, clean, well-lit, easy place to post. One that doesn't force us to make the same kind of product decisions that we had to before. I promise you we are focused on making this a long term project. It's not a startup and Brett and I are committed to making it work over the long haul.

8ig8 14y ago
What about making this a non-profit, run by a board? Different idea, but, for example Matt M. created the WordPress Foundation to independently carry out the things he believed in. http://wordpressfoundation.org/ http://wordpressfoundation.org/
- garry 14y ago
  Yes. I love this idea. Right now I have to focus on coding, but this will be necessary down the road.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - prawn 14y ago
    Might help in the event that something happens to both of you and users are left on a ghost ship of sorts.
- ingve 14y ago
  Apparently, that "independent" WordPress Foundation is still just Matt: "From an ultimate decision-making point of view, the Foundation is mainly just me. [...] It’s worth noting that the Foundation was created purely to be a trademark and IP holding entity that Automattic could transfer its ownership of the WordPress trademark to. There are no “members.”" [0] [0] http://wpkrauts.com/2013/leaders-and-the-greater-good/#comment-881 http://wpkrauts.com/2013/leaders-and-the-greater-good/#comme...
  - rickcolosimo 14y ago
    Without digging into the specifics of the matter,if the Foundation is indeed a 501(c)(3), the IRS should/will almost certainly have required it to have three independent board members. In addition, having counseled clients on this structure, the benefit of creating a nonprofit and giving it IP is that it creates a public check on anything to do with that IP. For example, while a startup's founders can sell the company, they can't unilaterally agree to sell off the IP in the nonprofit, and the public can challenge any such sales by recourse to a state attorney general's office. It's not perfect, but it helps protect the IP in the way founders want to. In many ways, it's a one-way decision, which is why it works. (Yes, IAAL.)

qeorge 14y ago

the founders of Posterous who sold out and then shuttered their service Seriously? Just gonna throw 'em under the bus like that? Friends like these.. Its time to stop trotting out this meme that the alternative to an "aquihire" was a sustainable business. Sometimes you've got to fish or cut bait. Ad hominem aside, trust should never be required for a good agreement. PostHaven has made a great start by killing any acquisition value from Day 1 by making their defining feature a promise never to sell. If they follow that up with e.g., transferring control of posthaven.com to a well-regarded foundation like Wikimedia, the EFF, or archive.org they could further remove the trust requirement from the contract they are forming with their users. That'd be great.

jbail 14y ago
There's nothing wrong with selling out. I assume Posterous was founded to make a profit at some point and selling out allowed them to do that. I'm actually 100% okay with that. I was merely calling out that "never selling out" is a strange proposal coming from someone with a track record for selling out...on the day that this former sold out service announces it is shutting down forever. It might just be bad timing to announce the next project more than anything.
- callmevlad 14y ago
  According to Garry [1], they had no idea that Twitter would make the announcement today, so the bad timing seems coincidental. [1] https://twitter.com/garrytan/status/302558780447682560 https://twitter.com/garrytan/status/302558780447682560
shrikant 14y ago
> PostHaven has made a great start by killing any acquisition value from Day 1 by making their defining feature a promise never to sell. Just like OkCupid's intensive, well-researched, data-driven post on why online dating needs to be free scared off Match.com from acquiring them?
- tedunangst 14y ago

marginalboy 14y ago

I don't think you're being very fair. You're suggesting a false dichotomy.

sfard 14y ago

For those interested, I built http://throwww.com http://throwww.com which is a free (and with an obvious bias) better alternative.

cuchi_costa 14y ago
Hey sfard, how do i reach you?