3 ms·
> The more you share, obviously, the better. Better for who? They obviously have a strategy, and your comment is rude and presumptive. This is why people ofte
by throwawayun 13y ago
> The more you share, obviously, the better.
Better for who?
They obviously have a strategy, and your comment is rude and presumptive. This is why people often hate the press.
- mcarney7 13y agoWe didn't write "stripe's metrics today are X." We wrote, "Stripe's metrics 6 months ago, when they were in fundraising and M&A talks were X...during the same period its competitors metrics were Y, Z." Seems fair and accurate. Stripe doesn't need to share data if it doesn't want, but then criticizing us for being inaccurate is a bit ridiculous. Also, it's not our job to tell Stripe's (or any company's) story as they want it told. It's to report on the ecosystem. Its better for the ecosystem – investors, competitors, customers, etc. – if they share transparent numbers.
- ivanca 13y ago>Stripe doesn't need to share data if it doesn't want, but then criticizing us for being inaccurate is a bit ridiculous. Ridiculous is to making ANY present tense assertions when your using old data, like in the title you don't say "Memo for Stripe for where it was 6 months ago" or any other indication of the time period at hand. Your magazine is the only thing here poisonous for the ecosystem.
- lotso 13y agoWriting articles on anonymous sources' information and criticizing a private company for not sharing their data, so you can write a new blog post is a bit ridiculous.