5 ms·

I wondered why Jason didn't just contact GS directly with his concerns. Even if his customers might be confused by GS, Jason knows who/what they are and could

I wondered why Jason didn't just contact GS directly with his concerns. Even if his customers might be confused by GS, Jason knows who/what they are and could of raised his grievances with them directly. Instead he published some serious accusations on his widely-read blog knowing it'd get a lot of buzz. I imagine this whole story could've played out a little better if instead of jumping the gun and shouting 'malice' he'd've taken some extra time to work things out directly with GS.

rimantas 18y ago
Because acting this way assures that the problem will be noticed and acted upon. Private letter would achieve nothing at worst and maybe some tweaks to 37signals page on GS at best. Customers of the other companies would get the same confusing message making it easy to take GS pages as official support. As you can see I don't believe in GetSatissfaction "mistakes". All the design decisions (which eventually led to the trouble with 37s) they took look very logical.
- tptacek 18y ago
  Also, because maybe Fried doesn't give a shit about whether GS gets their act together (as long as they fix the page), but does care that the 100 other startups that have the bright idea of grabbing 37signals logos have some idea that they're going to get smacked down for doing that.
  - gry 18y ago
    I wonder how the discussion would've been had Jason used GS' site itself to note concerns. It'd be a sanctioned and public forum. Would people be discussing public vs private airing of grievances? Probably not.
    - Semiapies 18y ago
      One of Fried's original points was that they didn't want to run a duplicate support site just because another company wanted to make money off of them.
    - tptacek 18y ago
      You're right. And again, this whole "public" vs "private" thing is nonsense; 37s is complaining about a very public offense commited by GS for profit. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
adamhowell 18y ago
Reposting my comment from the post itself: "@Tom: “why call them out so publicly on it, did you try an email and that failed? Why do it so angrily and so publicly?” This is such a weak claim, that pointing out things on blogs rather than keeping them private is somehow wrong. A) If you, as a company, are doing something that is arguably wrong, underhanded, etc., it is entirely fair game to be called out on that in public. The best analogy I can come up with at the moment is, it’s like being angry at whistle blowers for going public instead of solely trying to resolve the issue inside the company. Tobacco, Enron, etc. B) Doing stuff in public - and getting the momentum of other people behind you - gets things done a lot faster than being pissed in private does. It’s also a lot more transparent, which is a part of what the web is all about. We all open up criticism of ourselves from anybody and everybody through blog comments, it’s totally natural to do the same through blog posts."
- unalone 18y ago
  Great comment. The idea that "everything is public" is the best thing about the Internet. Transparency is awesome.
run4yourlives 18y ago
He could have also just sent a cease and desist order from his lawyers. Point is that the way Jason reacted was his choice. Notably, it was pretty much in the same form that GS promotes as a part of its service.
batasrki 18y ago
I don't agree with anyone who has replied here. The public rant equivalent to shouting through a megaphone, while 80,000 people who might have their own, smaller megaphones intently listen. There was no need for this, unless the private e-mail did not resolve the problem. Refer back to what Sarah said. The user who had a problem with 37Signals created the initial page. How is this GetSatisfaction's issue and more importantly, how is it a justification for publicly slamming another business?
- dschobel 18y ago
  But there absolutely was a need for this public flogging for all the hundreds of companies who care about their customer relationship who may not be aware of GS' dubious tactics.
- trapper 18y ago
  Perhaps GS could just shut down it's service and redirect all customers with problems or questions to send an email first?
jsdalton 18y ago
I don't actually agree with you, but I upvoted you because I think your point is at least legitimate. I wish people on HN would stop downvoting comments simply because they disagree with them. Different perspectives add value to conversation!
- Semiapies 18y ago
  I'd had to up-vote a few people in these threads who've said things I disagreed with, but were at least valid. However, I'm clearly not the only one doing that; a lot of suddenly-downvoted stuff that wasn't outright GS fanboying has re-emerged pretty quickly.

rimantas 18y ago

Because acting this way assures that the problem will be noticed and acted upon. Private letter would achieve nothing at worst and maybe some tweaks to 37signals page on GS at best. Customers of the other companies would get the same confusing message making it easy to take GS pages as official support. As you can see I don't believe in GetSatissfaction "mistakes". All the design decisions (which eventually led to the trouble with 37s) they took look very logical.

tptacek 18y ago
Also, because maybe Fried doesn't give a shit about whether GS gets their act together (as long as they fix the page), but does care that the 100 other startups that have the bright idea of grabbing 37signals logos have some idea that they're going to get smacked down for doing that.
- gry 18y ago
  I wonder how the discussion would've been had Jason used GS' site itself to note concerns. It'd be a sanctioned and public forum. Would people be discussing public vs private airing of grievances? Probably not.
  - Semiapies 18y ago
    One of Fried's original points was that they didn't want to run a duplicate support site just because another company wanted to make money off of them.
  - tptacek 18y ago
    You're right. And again, this whole "public" vs "private" thing is nonsense; 37s is complaining about a very public offense commited by GS for profit. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

adamhowell 18y ago

Reposting my comment from the post itself: "@Tom: “why call them out so publicly on it, did you try an email and that failed? Why do it so angrily and so publicly?” This is such a weak claim, that pointing out things on blogs rather than keeping them private is somehow wrong. A) If you, as a company, are doing something that is arguably wrong, underhanded, etc., it is entirely fair game to be called out on that in public. The best analogy I can come up with at the moment is, it’s like being angry at whistle blowers for going public instead of solely trying to resolve the issue inside the company. Tobacco, Enron, etc. B) Doing stuff in public - and getting the momentum of other people behind you - gets things done a lot faster than being pissed in private does. It’s also a lot more transparent, which is a part of what the web is all about. We all open up criticism of ourselves from anybody and everybody through blog comments, it’s totally natural to do the same through blog posts."

unalone 18y ago
Great comment. The idea that "everything is public" is the best thing about the Internet. Transparency is awesome.

run4yourlives 18y ago

He could have also just sent a cease and desist order from his lawyers. Point is that the way Jason reacted was his choice. Notably, it was pretty much in the same form that GS promotes as a part of its service.

batasrki 18y ago

I don't agree with anyone who has replied here. The public rant equivalent to shouting through a megaphone, while 80,000 people who might have their own, smaller megaphones intently listen. There was no need for this, unless the private e-mail did not resolve the problem. Refer back to what Sarah said. The user who had a problem with 37Signals created the initial page. How is this GetSatisfaction's issue and more importantly, how is it a justification for publicly slamming another business?

dschobel 18y ago
But there absolutely was a need for this public flogging for all the hundreds of companies who care about their customer relationship who may not be aware of GS' dubious tactics.
trapper 18y ago
Perhaps GS could just shut down it's service and redirect all customers with problems or questions to send an email first?

jsdalton 18y ago

I don't actually agree with you, but I upvoted you because I think your point is at least legitimate. I wish people on HN would stop downvoting comments simply because they disagree with them. Different perspectives add value to conversation!

Semiapies 18y ago
I'd had to up-vote a few people in these threads who've said things I disagreed with, but were at least valid. However, I'm clearly not the only one doing that; a lot of suddenly-downvoted stuff that wasn't outright GS fanboying has re-emerged pretty quickly.