4 ms·

Again, what you consider a "tangential issue" is directly linked to a $5 billion dollar lawsuit over interchange fees (actually, several, that's just the latest

Again, what you consider a "tangential issue" is directly linked to a $5 billion dollar lawsuit over interchange fees (actually, several, that's just the latest one). Where I come from, that amount of money is not "tangential." It's core. I think ethics are important. I don't really know much about your background. But it's disingenuous of you to claim that it's irrelevant when you're an investor with links to Walmart. The only reason I sound like a crazy person to you is because, as you admit, you "never really get to the meat of what [I'm] saying." That's easily remedied by actually reading what's written, as opposed to just scoffing and writing me off as crazy. As for format, I've tried just about everything there is, but I'm open to suggestions. In any event, my approach seems to be working, whether you want to admit it or not: http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_2209&sess=CUR&house=B http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_2209&...

joshu 12y ago
I guess my point is that it just seems like you are using any relevant point to talk about your own issues. Conversation is a give and take, not an infinite loop. I never claimed that ethics weren't important. I am saying that your mode of presentation is tiresome and makes your point impenetrable.
- thinkcomp 12y ago
  And it seems like you are flippantly excusing Y Combinator's ethical double standard because you're not interested in hearing about how pervasive unethical behavior is in the industry from a person you've never met but you're pretty sure you don't like, no matter how much evidence is a click away. Tiresome indeed.
  - joshu 12y ago
    You aren't actually listening to what I am saying, so it should be no surprise that I am not listening to what you are saying. Do you see how this works?
    - thinkcomp 12y ago
      Your argument is that I'm tiresome. My argument is that you're ignorant, and perhaps willfully so. I think we can leave it at that.
      - joshu 12y ago
        If you are having trouble getting your point across, it's probably you. I don't think I even disagree with the issues you point out. It's just that I hate the way you present them.
        thinkcomp 12y ago
        Perhaps that's because according to AngelList you're an investor in Square, which has signed two consent decrees for violating money transmission laws. That would make you a federal felon per 18 U.S.C. § 1960. And it sure would suck if my "presentation" caused you some legal trouble. The feeling is mutual.
        joshu 12y ago
        Why, then, are you surprised how people react to you here?
        thinkcomp 12y ago
        Because I'd expect someone as smart as you, with a clear financial stake in the money transmission regulatory situation, to realize that you can make more money by helping to promote reform than you can by hiding your connections to the mess and trying to shut me up. If you haven't noticed, that strategy isn't working.
        joshu 12y ago
        I'm not trying to shut you up. I'm trying to get you to phrase your message so that other humans will want to consume it. How am I hiding my connections? Accusing people of felons is probably also not a good way to rally them to your cause. Even here you are bent on turning the discussion to your cause. I'm talking about the phrasing, not the message. It does seem creepy that you see enemies and opposition everywhere. Good luck with your cause - you need it. FWIW my investment in Square was small and because Jack was a friend. I'm not really injured either way, though would generally like to see laws make sense in the interest of parsimony. Also FWIW, I think plainsite is pretty good. Wow, news.yc makes this thread really narrow. Probably punishment for belaboring the point.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  > I guess my point is that it just seems like you are using any relevant point to talk about your own issues. If it were only the relevant ones then that would be one thing. But this threadjacking is getting a bit much.
pygy_ 12y ago
You don't sound crazy to me, but definitely angry, which makes it painful for me to read you. The technicalities are way over my head, but even if you're right, you're unlikely to get any reply from YC since a law suit is pending... Unsolicited advice: From what others say in this thread, it sounds like you're obsessed with this issue. If I understand correctly, you've been wronged and filed a law suit because of it. Let your lawyers do their thing, and move on. Your rants cause you more pain than they cause to the people you accuse.
- gojomo 12y ago
  Re: "Let your lawyers do their thing" Greenspan is acting as his own lawyer in this action (unless other counsel has been added since the initial complaint).
  - thinkcomp 12y ago
    False. Read the docket, linked above.
    - gojomo 12y ago
      Thanks for the update, I was relying on your original complaint's text that "…Plaintiff's Board of Directors wishes Plaintiff’s CEO, Aaron Greenspan, to represent Think Computer Corporation in this matter before the Court", but my parenthetical qualification allowed for the chance you might have acquired lawyers later.

joshu 12y ago

I guess my point is that it just seems like you are using any relevant point to talk about your own issues. Conversation is a give and take, not an infinite loop. I never claimed that ethics weren't important. I am saying that your mode of presentation is tiresome and makes your point impenetrable.

thinkcomp 12y ago
And it seems like you are flippantly excusing Y Combinator's ethical double standard because you're not interested in hearing about how pervasive unethical behavior is in the industry from a person you've never met but you're pretty sure you don't like, no matter how much evidence is a click away. Tiresome indeed.
- joshu 12y ago
  You aren't actually listening to what I am saying, so it should be no surprise that I am not listening to what you are saying. Do you see how this works?
  - thinkcomp 12y ago
    Your argument is that I'm tiresome. My argument is that you're ignorant, and perhaps willfully so. I think we can leave it at that.
    - joshu 12y ago
      If you are having trouble getting your point across, it's probably you. I don't think I even disagree with the issues you point out. It's just that I hate the way you present them.
      - thinkcomp 12y ago
        Perhaps that's because according to AngelList you're an investor in Square, which has signed two consent decrees for violating money transmission laws. That would make you a federal felon per 18 U.S.C. § 1960. And it sure would suck if my "presentation" caused you some legal trouble. The feeling is mutual.
        joshu 12y ago
        Why, then, are you surprised how people react to you here?
        thinkcomp 12y ago
        Because I'd expect someone as smart as you, with a clear financial stake in the money transmission regulatory situation, to realize that you can make more money by helping to promote reform than you can by hiding your connections to the mess and trying to shut me up. If you haven't noticed, that strategy isn't working.
        joshu 12y ago
        I'm not trying to shut you up. I'm trying to get you to phrase your message so that other humans will want to consume it. How am I hiding my connections? Accusing people of felons is probably also not a good way to rally them to your cause. Even here you are bent on turning the discussion to your cause. I'm talking about the phrasing, not the message. It does seem creepy that you see enemies and opposition everywhere. Good luck with your cause - you need it. FWIW my investment in Square was small and because Jack was a friend. I'm not really injured either way, though would generally like to see laws make sense in the interest of parsimony. Also FWIW, I think plainsite is pretty good. Wow, news.yc makes this thread really narrow. Probably punishment for belaboring the point.
jacquesm 12y ago
> I guess my point is that it just seems like you are using any relevant point to talk about your own issues. If it were only the relevant ones then that would be one thing. But this threadjacking is getting a bit much.

pygy_ 12y ago

You don't sound crazy to me, but definitely angry, which makes it painful for me to read you. The technicalities are way over my head, but even if you're right, you're unlikely to get any reply from YC since a law suit is pending... Unsolicited advice: From what others say in this thread, it sounds like you're obsessed with this issue. If I understand correctly, you've been wronged and filed a law suit because of it. Let your lawyers do their thing, and move on. Your rants cause you more pain than they cause to the people you accuse.

gojomo 12y ago
Re: "Let your lawyers do their thing" Greenspan is acting as his own lawyer in this action (unless other counsel has been added since the initial complaint).
- thinkcomp 12y ago
  False. Read the docket, linked above.
  - gojomo 12y ago
    Thanks for the update, I was relying on your original complaint's text that "…Plaintiff's Board of Directors wishes Plaintiff’s CEO, Aaron Greenspan, to represent Think Computer Corporation in this matter before the Court", but my parenthetical qualification allowed for the chance you might have acquired lawyers later.