2 ms·
You're arguing from premises that don't seem valid to me (and likely others): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=542530 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=54
by Semiapies 18y ago
You're arguing from premises that don't seem valid to me (and likely others):
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=542530 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=542530
The whole "GS is to blame here, as well" (emphasis added) approach probably strikes people as either GS-fanboyish or 37S-haterish.
The wrong was done by GS - full stop. The repeated assertions by a few people that Fried was wrong to publicly complain about the wrongdoing aren't convincing people.
- batasrki 18y agoWhy not? That's my whole point. Whenever someone complains against Google, Microsoft, take your pick, they've done pretty much everything they could have to first privately resolve the issue. Saying that 37Signals have the right to completely skip to public flogging of another company IS fanboyish. That's all I am saying. If this is supposed to be a forum of objective readers, why are they completely discarding that part? I am not a fanboy of GS. Until this, I've only heard of them maybe three times. This is about objectivity and bullying. Jason Fried has a big enough of a forum to bully another company and he's done it. Why is that that can't stand on its own, divorced from the argument for/against GS?
- Semiapies 18y ago"Why not?" Because publicly criticizing wrongful, damaging behavior is not "bullying" in the eyes of most people. That, in fact, is exactly why it's embarrassing for the people complained about in cases like this. "Saying that 37Signals have the right to completely skip to public flogging of another company IS fanboyish." Well, I'll cop to being a total free speech fanboy.
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]