3 ms·

I beg to differ. There's nothing to be gained by accusing anyone. When I'd written the article it never occured to me that the title might come across as infl

I beg to differ. There's nothing to be gained by accusing anyone. When I'd written the article it never occured to me that the title might come across as inflammatory. I think an edit is due. However, I do feel the underlying issue is well worthy of discussion. What I personally feel is if you believe you have the next big idea, you must limit disclosure to a handful. There's a fear of rejection that might compel many to disclose their concept at several fora. That might eventually hurt them. And finally, please don't get personal. I'm expressing personal opinion, and I'm ready to edit bits if they seem insinuous/inflammatory. But nobody likes getting flamed after having put in a fair amount of effort into compiling something they feel might be insightful to others.

calambrac 18y ago
There's nothing to be gained by accusing anyone. I think you missed my point. You're trying to have it both ways: you're not willing to stand behind an actual accusation, so instead you hide behind weasel language and only insinuate. When I'd written the article it never occured to me that the title might come across as inflammatory. You didn't think insinuating that these incubators are stealing ideas and passing them to their own people would be inflammatory? Please. What I personally feel is if you believe you have the next big idea, you must limit disclosure to a handful. Fine, then say that. You have no evidence that it's actually happened, though. Your little list is not evidence. And finally, please don't get personal. What did I say that was personal? Everything I've said has been directly about the article, except for the bit that you weren't off to a good start. But nobody likes getting flamed after having put in a fair amount of effort into compiling something they feel might be insightful to others. I have a really hard time believing you had no clue this would be seen negatively by some people. The whole point of the article is to insinuate, without any real evidence, that these companies are doing something unethical. Honestly, what did you expect in return?
- jibiki 18y ago
  > You're trying to have it both ways: you're not willing to stand behind an actual accusation, so instead you hide behind weasel language and only insinuate. Well, how else do you present negative or inconclusive results? I would say the correct method is to ask a question: "will my startup have to compete with a clone if I seek VC?" That's pretty much what he did. He presented the evidence, and frankly, it's not very strong. That doesn't make it a disingenuous post, just a boring one.

calambrac 18y ago

There's nothing to be gained by accusing anyone. I think you missed my point. You're trying to have it both ways: you're not willing to stand behind an actual accusation, so instead you hide behind weasel language and only insinuate. When I'd written the article it never occured to me that the title might come across as inflammatory. You didn't think insinuating that these incubators are stealing ideas and passing them to their own people would be inflammatory? Please. What I personally feel is if you believe you have the next big idea, you must limit disclosure to a handful. Fine, then say that. You have no evidence that it's actually happened, though. Your little list is not evidence. And finally, please don't get personal. What did I say that was personal? Everything I've said has been directly about the article, except for the bit that you weren't off to a good start. But nobody likes getting flamed after having put in a fair amount of effort into compiling something they feel might be insightful to others. I have a really hard time believing you had no clue this would be seen negatively by some people. The whole point of the article is to insinuate, without any real evidence, that these companies are doing something unethical. Honestly, what did you expect in return?

jibiki 18y ago
> You're trying to have it both ways: you're not willing to stand behind an actual accusation, so instead you hide behind weasel language and only insinuate. Well, how else do you present negative or inconclusive results? I would say the correct method is to ask a question: "will my startup have to compete with a clone if I seek VC?" That's pretty much what he did. He presented the evidence, and frankly, it's not very strong. That doesn't make it a disingenuous post, just a boring one.