3 ms·

I keep hearing people bandying about this "VC connection" baseless innuendo. How is that anything but baseless, cynical speculation? Remember, we're talking ab

I keep hearing people bandying about this "VC connection" baseless innuendo. How is that anything but baseless, cynical speculation? Remember, we're talking about someone (Matt Cutts) who penalized Google's own Chome website for improper links. If there was ever a conflict of interest, that would be it. The idea that Matt was doing RG a special favor through a16z or other investors is an extraordinary claim, and we're going to need more evidence than just gut feeling.

benologist 13y ago
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/disclosure/ http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/disclosure/ Also, I have invested in Perfect Third (the company that makes the WakeMate), Zencoder, Cardpool, Tasty Labs, Drchrono, Grubwithus, PoundPay, Apportable, Mailgun, and Parse. I have also invested in CircuitHub, PlanGrid, Pixelapse, ZenPayroll, Trigger.io, Zenefits, and True Link Financial. I have also invested in Lowercase Capital (Lowercase Ventures Fund I), Y Combinator (Y Combinator Fund II), Lowercase 140, and Lowercase Spur. Pretty reasonable to assume RG enjoyed a direct line to Cutts all through the entire thing.
- argonaut 13y ago
  X is an investor, therefore X must be directly persuaded by Y investor? That's not any evidence that RG specifically had a direct line to Cutts, and that this actually influenced the outcome. Again, we're talking about someone who penalized Chrome. I don't know of any greater conflict of interest than your employer. In an argument about someone's motivations, I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in the context of their past behavior.
  - benologist 13y ago
    I'm inclined to believe that savvy investors would leverage their own investors and network to solve problems when they can. Especially when X is an investor in Y. The incredibly fast timeline is pretty clear evidence of communication considering the standard response time is never and the standard unpunishing time is never and the standard result is basically "change your domain".

benologist 13y ago

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/disclosure/ http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/disclosure/ Also, I have invested in Perfect Third (the company that makes the WakeMate), Zencoder, Cardpool, Tasty Labs, Drchrono, Grubwithus, PoundPay, Apportable, Mailgun, and Parse. I have also invested in CircuitHub, PlanGrid, Pixelapse, ZenPayroll, Trigger.io, Zenefits, and True Link Financial. I have also invested in Lowercase Capital (Lowercase Ventures Fund I), Y Combinator (Y Combinator Fund II), Lowercase 140, and Lowercase Spur. Pretty reasonable to assume RG enjoyed a direct line to Cutts all through the entire thing.

argonaut 13y ago
X is an investor, therefore X must be directly persuaded by Y investor? That's not any evidence that RG specifically had a direct line to Cutts, and that this actually influenced the outcome. Again, we're talking about someone who penalized Chrome. I don't know of any greater conflict of interest than your employer. In an argument about someone's motivations, I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in the context of their past behavior.
- benologist 13y ago
  I'm inclined to believe that savvy investors would leverage their own investors and network to solve problems when they can. Especially when X is an investor in Y. The incredibly fast timeline is pretty clear evidence of communication considering the standard response time is never and the standard unpunishing time is never and the standard result is basically "change your domain".