3 ms·

I feel like any "X is bullshit" post that doesn't start out with a definition of X or Y or Z is just a glorified troll. Half this thread is going to be people

I feel like any "X is bullshit" post that doesn't start out with a definition of X or Y or Z is just a glorified troll. Half this thread is going to be people either identifying with or attacking the straw man that's posed but isn't really defined well. Even among people who run accelerators, incubators, and other types of programs, there is a lot of debate over where the lines begin, end, etc. Instead of saying "incubators are bullshit" why not just saying "Doing bullshit is bullshit" since that seems to be the actual point of this post. Don't do unproductive stuff that doesn't actually advance your startup. Great. That advice is just as appropriate for outside of incubator people as those within an incubator. For example, while reading this article I just kept getting distracted from the actual main point - many incubators just provide low cost office space. Is that bullshit? Many incubators aren't actually accelerators like the author seems to confuse the term with. Is that bullshit? I remember reading an article from the New Yorker where they talked about making fun of wannabe authors who just sit around and do everything that authors are supposed to do except write. They called this "writering" and it seems like the author is trying to say the same thing about "startuping". Good. But that problem will always exist, regardless of whatever incubator you're in or not in. So maybe we should focus on the actual problem instead of just blasting a straw man, hoping for clicks?

Jgrubb 13y ago
I'd personally be happy with a blanket ban on "X is bullshit" posts on here. I don't think I've ever read one that wasn't pointless linkbait. Also, on the topic of getting distracted - they might work some of the time, but I think pop ups that nag you for your email address are bullshit.
- acjohnson55 13y ago
  I actually found the article to be thought-provoking. I think there actually is a problem of inexperienced founders setting their sights on just getting into an accelerator, distracting them from the bigger picture.
cardmagic 13y ago
The point of the post was that many incubators are actively encouraging first time startup founders who don't know any better to do bullshit. The point is that in many cases, first time founders are better off spending their time NOT applying for incubators or doing incubators because then at least they won't be encouraged to do bullshit. There are obviously exceptions (YC is one of them), however the point of this article is to point out the rampant bait-and-switch that has emerged from me-too incubators.
- nemesisj 13y ago
  And yet, without defining what you mean by incubator, the whole thing goes off the tracks immediately. Y Combinator and TechStars identify themselves as accelerators. From Y Combinator's google profile: "Y Combinator is an American seed accelerator, started in March 2005." From TechStars: "TechStars is a mentorship-driven startup accelerator founded by..." There's a difference. Most incubators in my area mainly focus on cheap rent, hotdesking, and basic infrastructure. Nothing like what you're taking issue with. So the whole thing is confusing.
ThomPete 13y ago
If there is one thing I have learned through blogging it is that it's better to simplify your claims unapologetically and then in the comments refine. I have tried to define X and it had absolutely no effect on the "pro/con" comments I had. Its not what you write it's what people put into it. I wrote this way back http://000fff.org/getting-to-the-customer-why-everything-you-think-about-user-centred-design-is-wrong/ http://000fff.org/getting-to-the-customer-why-everything-you... Check the comments and I even went through the hassle of defining it. Someone even made a presentation about how I was wrong (and called me a tool :) ) http://www.slideshare.net/joystik/response-towhyeverythingyouknowaboutucdiswrong http://www.slideshare.net/joystik/response-towhyeverythingyo... So I say. Better to simplify (within reason of course) and then add details in the discussion. But each to their own.
monkeyboysteve 13y ago
As soon as I clicked through and saw the site was really about promoting another manifesto and book I closed the screen.
gdudeman 13y ago
It's fine to call something bullshit if you can back your assertion up with data. However, calling something bullshit with unsupported assertions is, well, bullshit.

Jgrubb 13y ago

I'd personally be happy with a blanket ban on "X is bullshit" posts on here. I don't think I've ever read one that wasn't pointless linkbait. Also, on the topic of getting distracted - they might work some of the time, but I think pop ups that nag you for your email address are bullshit.

acjohnson55 13y ago
I actually found the article to be thought-provoking. I think there actually is a problem of inexperienced founders setting their sights on just getting into an accelerator, distracting them from the bigger picture.

cardmagic 13y ago

The point of the post was that many incubators are actively encouraging first time startup founders who don't know any better to do bullshit. The point is that in many cases, first time founders are better off spending their time NOT applying for incubators or doing incubators because then at least they won't be encouraged to do bullshit. There are obviously exceptions (YC is one of them), however the point of this article is to point out the rampant bait-and-switch that has emerged from me-too incubators.

nemesisj 13y ago
And yet, without defining what you mean by incubator, the whole thing goes off the tracks immediately. Y Combinator and TechStars identify themselves as accelerators. From Y Combinator's google profile: "Y Combinator is an American seed accelerator, started in March 2005." From TechStars: "TechStars is a mentorship-driven startup accelerator founded by..." There's a difference. Most incubators in my area mainly focus on cheap rent, hotdesking, and basic infrastructure. Nothing like what you're taking issue with. So the whole thing is confusing.

ThomPete 13y ago

If there is one thing I have learned through blogging it is that it's better to simplify your claims unapologetically and then in the comments refine. I have tried to define X and it had absolutely no effect on the "pro/con" comments I had. Its not what you write it's what people put into it. I wrote this way back http://000fff.org/getting-to-the-customer-why-everything-you-think-about-user-centred-design-is-wrong/ http://000fff.org/getting-to-the-customer-why-everything-you... Check the comments and I even went through the hassle of defining it. Someone even made a presentation about how I was wrong (and called me a tool :) ) http://www.slideshare.net/joystik/response-towhyeverythingyouknowaboutucdiswrong http://www.slideshare.net/joystik/response-towhyeverythingyo... So I say. Better to simplify (within reason of course) and then add details in the discussion. But each to their own.

monkeyboysteve 13y ago

As soon as I clicked through and saw the site was really about promoting another manifesto and book I closed the screen.

gdudeman 13y ago

It's fine to call something bullshit if you can back your assertion up with data. However, calling something bullshit with unsupported assertions is, well, bullshit.