13 ms·

>" in a way that is insulting to Dropbox, TechCrunch/AOL, CrunchFund, and the Mailbox/Orchestra team" Arrington is a jerk and MG is a talentless shill. They'r

>" in a way that is insulting to Dropbox, TechCrunch/AOL, CrunchFund, and the Mailbox/Orchestra team" Arrington is a jerk and MG is a talentless shill. They're both "right place, right time" guys who strut around with undeserved influence. I care little about insulting Techcrunch/AOL or Crunchfund. When banks do things like this, we call for heads. When it's SV personalities, we're apologists. >"Arrington left TechCrunch because of his desire to return to investing about a year ago" You say left, I say forced out, because there was an obvious conflict of interest. >" Probably more important is that the Mailbox/Orchestra team is top notch at making incredible mobile products" That's nice. I suppose we'll agree to disagree that a company that built an app that sits on gmail is worth $100MM.

jasonshen 14y ago
If you were born into a middle class American family in the late 20th century and have no major disabilities you are a "right place right time" person. The just world hypothesis is false - most people with any kind of power had immense luck and opportunity going for them irrespective of their talent or ability.
ghshephard 14y ago
Arrington and MG may be many things, but they've fought and scrambled in the face of a lot of obstacles and naysayers to get where they are today. Arrington in particular, grew Techcrunch from a blog in his bedroom to the major presence that is today. Siegler is a talented writer, and has a lot of interesting technology insights. He also has a good eye for up and coming companies - which is obviously why Arrington recruited him as a General Partner for Crunch Fund. I don't know Arrington personally, so I can't comment on the jerk comment. Feel free to critique them for what they are, but let's be reasonable and respect them for what they've done. Saying that they've accomplished is a result of "undeserved influence" belittles that.
- tatsuke95 14y ago
  >"Siegler is a talented writer, and has a lot of interesting technology insights." You and I are worlds apart on what a "talented writer" is. Case-in-point: John Gruber is what I would consider a talented tech writer.
  - pbreit 14y ago
    MG is a reasonably good writer. He's an even better hustler and has terrific sources, two invaluable assets for what he does. Gruber has all three assets as well but is even more exclusive in what he writes about. You totally bungled this one.
pg 14y ago
It embarrasses me to see comments like this getting upvoted on HN. There is no information in it, just inflammatory language. When this sort of comment prevails on HN, we'll have sunk to the ground state of forums.
- DenisM 14y ago
  I subscribe to broken windows theory and think we should discourage any instance of sarcasm, adhom, and other inappropriate methods of arguing, no matter how small, so that larger transgressions look awfully out of place. It would help if you updated the rules with explicit ban on those things. It might also help to have a sort of discourse police - mods should not only ban for bad behavior but make it publicly visible.
- samiur1204 14y ago
  I'm never surprised to see these sorts of comments even in discussion forums that I hold in high esteem, such as HN. As an engineer, I've seen pretty heated arguments about very silly things such as whose editor is better. These are generally very intelligent people, but are susceptible to cognitive dissonance. Rational discourse goes out the window at that point, because they're convinced they're right and it's impossible that other view points may be correct. It's part of the reason most of the world is still religious. I bet you if there were down votes allowed on HN, this post would be about dead even, because tons of people probably disagree with him. But it's just the right sort of inflammatory comments that garners attention and get up votes too.
  - pavs 14y ago
    > I bet you if there were down votes allowed on HN, this post would be about dead even, because tons of people probably disagree with him. Downvotes are allowed on HN, you have to have a certain amount of "points" to be able to downvote.
    - samiur1204 14y ago
      Ahh, that might be nice to get to someday.

jasonshen 14y ago

If you were born into a middle class American family in the late 20th century and have no major disabilities you are a "right place right time" person. The just world hypothesis is false - most people with any kind of power had immense luck and opportunity going for them irrespective of their talent or ability.

ghshephard 14y ago

Arrington and MG may be many things, but they've fought and scrambled in the face of a lot of obstacles and naysayers to get where they are today. Arrington in particular, grew Techcrunch from a blog in his bedroom to the major presence that is today. Siegler is a talented writer, and has a lot of interesting technology insights. He also has a good eye for up and coming companies - which is obviously why Arrington recruited him as a General Partner for Crunch Fund. I don't know Arrington personally, so I can't comment on the jerk comment. Feel free to critique them for what they are, but let's be reasonable and respect them for what they've done. Saying that they've accomplished is a result of "undeserved influence" belittles that.

tatsuke95 14y ago
>"Siegler is a talented writer, and has a lot of interesting technology insights." You and I are worlds apart on what a "talented writer" is. Case-in-point: John Gruber is what I would consider a talented tech writer.
- pbreit 14y ago
  MG is a reasonably good writer. He's an even better hustler and has terrific sources, two invaluable assets for what he does. Gruber has all three assets as well but is even more exclusive in what he writes about. You totally bungled this one.

pg 14y ago

It embarrasses me to see comments like this getting upvoted on HN. There is no information in it, just inflammatory language. When this sort of comment prevails on HN, we'll have sunk to the ground state of forums.

DenisM 14y ago
I subscribe to broken windows theory and think we should discourage any instance of sarcasm, adhom, and other inappropriate methods of arguing, no matter how small, so that larger transgressions look awfully out of place. It would help if you updated the rules with explicit ban on those things. It might also help to have a sort of discourse police - mods should not only ban for bad behavior but make it publicly visible.
samiur1204 14y ago
I'm never surprised to see these sorts of comments even in discussion forums that I hold in high esteem, such as HN. As an engineer, I've seen pretty heated arguments about very silly things such as whose editor is better. These are generally very intelligent people, but are susceptible to cognitive dissonance. Rational discourse goes out the window at that point, because they're convinced they're right and it's impossible that other view points may be correct. It's part of the reason most of the world is still religious. I bet you if there were down votes allowed on HN, this post would be about dead even, because tons of people probably disagree with him. But it's just the right sort of inflammatory comments that garners attention and get up votes too.
- pavs 14y ago
  > I bet you if there were down votes allowed on HN, this post would be about dead even, because tons of people probably disagree with him. Downvotes are allowed on HN, you have to have a certain amount of "points" to be able to downvote.
  - samiur1204 14y ago
    Ahh, that might be nice to get to someday.