4 ms·

It's Pando. What did you expect? I don't know why Pando links so show up on HN.

ansimionescu 12y ago
As someone who knows nothing about Pando, I'd love some more insight into why they supposedly suck. (Speaking of shitty high-profile news site, my favourite pick is ReadWrie. 80% of what I've read on their site is utter garbage.)
- wutbrodo 12y ago
  Wow, I was actually about to comment the exact same thing as lallysingh until I saw his comment. > As someone who knows nothing about Pando, I'd love some more insight into why they supposedly suck. This may not be a satisfying answer but it's the same reason as the one behind your opinion of ReadWrite: when you read enough of their articles (or at least enough of the ones that make it onto HN) and they're almost _all_ crap, it's a simple matter of numbers. As far as _how_ they got this way, just take a look at their pedigree; the founding members include the boot-scrapings of the tech-press: Sarah Lacy, Michael Arrington, M.G. Siegler, Farhad Manjoo, etc
  - waterlesscloud 12y ago
    I actually find the Lacy, etc articles to be the good ones. It's the lesser-known writers churning out several articles a day on the site that are consistently laughably wrong about nearly everything. It's hard not to come to the conclusion that's because they churn out several a day. Lacy's interviews are pretty decent quality, and I like the monthly in-depth interviews with the high-profile tech ceos. I think Pando's obsession with "speaking truth to power" has led them to make some poor choices in desperate attempts to create controversy. It's a seductive path for a journalist, but you've got to learn to do it right, and I don't think they have yet.
    - wutbrodo 12y ago
      You probably have a more nuanced view of the site than I do. I noticed the tendency I described very early on and more or less limited my further exposure to them, so maybe they've matured into what you're describing.
- zobzu 12y ago
  i actually often see pretty good articles on pando.

As someone who knows nothing about Pando, I'd love some more insight into why they supposedly suck. (Speaking of shitty high-profile news site, my favourite pick is ReadWrie. 80% of what I've read on their site is utter garbage.)

wutbrodo 12y ago
Wow, I was actually about to comment the exact same thing as lallysingh until I saw his comment. > As someone who knows nothing about Pando, I'd love some more insight into why they supposedly suck. This may not be a satisfying answer but it's the same reason as the one behind your opinion of ReadWrite: when you read enough of their articles (or at least enough of the ones that make it onto HN) and they're almost _all_ crap, it's a simple matter of numbers. As far as _how_ they got this way, just take a look at their pedigree; the founding members include the boot-scrapings of the tech-press: Sarah Lacy, Michael Arrington, M.G. Siegler, Farhad Manjoo, etc
- waterlesscloud 12y ago
  I actually find the Lacy, etc articles to be the good ones. It's the lesser-known writers churning out several articles a day on the site that are consistently laughably wrong about nearly everything. It's hard not to come to the conclusion that's because they churn out several a day. Lacy's interviews are pretty decent quality, and I like the monthly in-depth interviews with the high-profile tech ceos. I think Pando's obsession with "speaking truth to power" has led them to make some poor choices in desperate attempts to create controversy. It's a seductive path for a journalist, but you've got to learn to do it right, and I don't think they have yet.
  - wutbrodo 12y ago
    You probably have a more nuanced view of the site than I do. I noticed the tendency I described very early on and more or less limited my further exposure to them, so maybe they've matured into what you're describing.
zobzu 12y ago
i actually often see pretty good articles on pando.