There is Experts Exchange, the company, and then there's experts-exchange.com. The majority of folks complaining have had a bad experience with the latter, whil

There is Experts Exchange, the company, and then there's experts-exchange.com. The majority of folks complaining have had a bad experience with the latter, while you are defending the former. A reasonable person should be able to separate the two, and so it's nice to hear more about the people behind the website. But that doesn't make the user experience on the website any better than it is on StackOverflow, and it is unlikely to change the fact that most folks memory of experts-exchange.com before StackOverflow existed is one of disappointment and deception, which is why it was so effective for Jeff and Joel to rally users around the notion of being the anti-experts-exchange. (I think they themselves made a distinction between the site and the people behind it at least once, and talked about having a conversation with an experts exchange employee or two. And it's worth remembering that that was only one of the few ways they desscribed their vision: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2008/04/introducing-stackoverflow-com.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2008/04/introducing-stackov...) So if you want to humanize your friends, keep writing about them, and I'm sure you'll get readers. It sounds like an interesting story. But it seems mistaken to expect that alone to counteract people's impression of the site itself. If you want to hear people say nicer things about experts-exchange, either listen to the folks who are happily using it and ignore the hate, or genuinely listen to complaints, find a way to make more people happy.