7 ms·

This feels like a thinly-veiled attack on Patrick McKenzie's character, backed up with zero factual evidence. I've known Patio11 personally for going on 5 year

This feels like a thinly-veiled attack on Patrick McKenzie's character, backed up with zero factual evidence. I've known Patio11 personally for going on 5 years. He's one of the most honest people I know and I've seen him donate countless hours to helping fellow bootstrappers. If you don't know him or his story first-hand, and haven't seen the hundreds (thousands?) of hours he's donated to the bootstrapper community, you should familiarize yourself with his story before commenting on this thread.

irrigation 11y ago
backed up with zero factual evidence This is a recurring theme of these sorts of replies (along with cries of jealousy or ad hominem attacks by people circling the wagons). "Factual", when the things I am questioning are based upon no demonstrated facts at all. patio11 gave advice on consulting which, as a long time consultant -- rather successfully (but still not enough to start doling wisdom) -- I found completely at odds with the reality I've endured, but it's a big world so maybe I just fly in different circles. It was advice being conveyed to people looking to enter or already in the game, and is purportedly based upon real world success and feedback. My first suspicion is that it's a piece obviously intending to draw attention to his newest venture (Starfighter, just as so many prior pieces were driven to focus SEO and attention on BCC, though we've seen that the return on that was miserable for the time invested and opportunity lost). That's always a warning side -- people often tend to aggrandize when seeking attention and link juice (and to find pat, sure-fire success formulas, because easy solution posts do best), and coincidentally that piece was linked to far and wide for the extraordinary claims. The second is that it is building a reputation at the cost of just words, which you can see throughout this thread: "Well BCC [a project that has seen so little success most people would have abandoned it long ago] was just for fun. He's really a super successful consultant." Because, the story goes, he was picking and choosing among clients shoveling money at him. $30K per week? $40K? Why not $50K? Just keep those rates hidden and escalating, biding your time and soon enough the money truck starts dumping. First they were successful for being an expert at optimizing a business. Now they're a high flying, top tier consultant that was so successful they hung up the hat. Are those facts? The former we have empirical evidence to the contrary, and the latter is founded only in words. It does not matter how personally protective of him you may feel, this is being doled out as life proven advice, and it is critical that everyone, no matter how much they think someone is a part of the community, be critical and naturally skeptical. Advice founded in success needs to demonstrate that success, and there is just nothing there beyond hand waving. There are no "facts", but just claims. Your demand that people shouldn't comment unless, effectively, they're a fan is simply outrageous and is the anti-HN. Someone donated lots of hours doesn't make their claims any more credible.
- blumkvist 11y ago
  I just wanted to chime in quickly. I've found much of the advice given by patio11 to be plain wrong in my experience. These conversations quickly fill up with Latin phrases barely copied out of wikipedia and I don't have the time or patience to discuss this with people I know nothing about. Take this as you wish, most of the stuff he says is exactly what a person looking in would THINK, but it is not the truth.
  - kasey_junk 11y ago
    And maybe thats the difference between your experience and patio11's? He did take the time (and lots of it) to write up his advice (though if you read his earlier stuff it was much less advice and much more "here is this thing I'm doing, lets see if it works"). He also has near endless patience when discussing this stuff with others. It doesn't hurt that he is a persuasive writer, and it is a skill he has obviously and publicly worked at. I for one would love to hear an opposing viewpoint, especially if it could be as well written and the author allowed as much access as patio11 does.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    Are you a consultant? What does your practice look like?
    - sfk 11y ago
      Perhaps not like this: https://blog.sucuri.net/2009/07/matasano-com-hacked.html https://blog.sucuri.net/2009/07/matasano-com-hacked.html
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Is that supposed to be clever? "Oh yeah? Oh yeah? Well... well, your Wordpress blog got hacked once." Sick burn.
    - blumkvist 11y ago
      Yes I am. I make analytics applications for sales&marketing departments. Forecasting/Simulation, Segmentation, Text analytics, etc. Typical client - establishment with 500-1000 employees. Projects are delivered to the clients as a SaaS solution, because they need maintenance. Quarterly invoices, 1 year minimum contract. Edit: more details
tptacek 11y ago
It's not at all thinly veiled. The account to which you're replying seems to have been created solely to harass him with.
- irrigation 11y ago
  Harass him? What an outrageously transparent attempt to prejudice the audience, which in this case happens to also be for your own benefit as well: Good judgment would have been that you should stay away from these threads (for those who don't know, tptacek is a cofounder, with patio11, of their "turn HN fame into value" startup), but instead you come rushing in guns blazing. I found the consulting story incredibly dubious. None of the facts meshed, and I find those sorts of pie in the sky stories to actually be destructive to people entering or in the industry. If you find skepticism "harassment" -- does fame on HN make one untouchable -- you have a very perverse sentiment of what that is.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    Two more paragraphs and not a single testable claim. What's probably more important for HN to know is that almost every single comment in your comment history follows this pattern. It is, literally, all you come here to write about. Not what specifically you find misleading about Patrick's consulting advice, but simply that you find the whole concept of Patrick "dubious". Especially amusing: "actually typing comments in response to your anonymous character sniping" == "guns blazing". Pew! Pew!
    - irrigation 11y ago
      "Two more paragraphs and not a single testable claim." More attempts at prejudicing claims, which is sort of your comment habit. FACT: you are a cofounder with Patrick FACT: it would be good judgment for you to stay away from these threads. You lack good judgment. FACT: you are trying to lever HN fame into startup success FACT: Patrick's posts about consulting -- which sort of came out of nowhere, suddenly telling of incredible consulting success -- are extraordinarily atypical. The single and only support for them is you, and people who have never done consulting but imagine up some scenario where it seems reasonable. FACT: Those posts drew lead-up attention to "Starfighter", that startup that you are a partner in. I mean, it must be a sure win initiative if someone is going to eschew $50K/week consulting engagements (I saw the story linked far and wide, people amazed at the elite consultant earning that sort of rate) that are easy to come by for it. The audience lines up. Your tactic of simply dropping prejudicing claims gets a pass on here because you earned the "security guy" goodwill. On most sites you would have been exiled as a troll long ago.
davidw 11y ago
I've only met patio11 in person very briefly (thaks to rwalling's MicroConf), but everything I saw confirmed the idea that he's a very nice, helpful person.

irrigation 11y ago

backed up with zero factual evidence This is a recurring theme of these sorts of replies (along with cries of jealousy or ad hominem attacks by people circling the wagons). "Factual", when the things I am questioning are based upon no demonstrated facts at all. patio11 gave advice on consulting which, as a long time consultant -- rather successfully (but still not enough to start doling wisdom) -- I found completely at odds with the reality I've endured, but it's a big world so maybe I just fly in different circles. It was advice being conveyed to people looking to enter or already in the game, and is purportedly based upon real world success and feedback. My first suspicion is that it's a piece obviously intending to draw attention to his newest venture (Starfighter, just as so many prior pieces were driven to focus SEO and attention on BCC, though we've seen that the return on that was miserable for the time invested and opportunity lost). That's always a warning side -- people often tend to aggrandize when seeking attention and link juice (and to find pat, sure-fire success formulas, because easy solution posts do best), and coincidentally that piece was linked to far and wide for the extraordinary claims. The second is that it is building a reputation at the cost of just words, which you can see throughout this thread: "Well BCC [a project that has seen so little success most people would have abandoned it long ago] was just for fun. He's really a super successful consultant." Because, the story goes, he was picking and choosing among clients shoveling money at him. $30K per week? $40K? Why not $50K? Just keep those rates hidden and escalating, biding your time and soon enough the money truck starts dumping. First they were successful for being an expert at optimizing a business. Now they're a high flying, top tier consultant that was so successful they hung up the hat. Are those facts? The former we have empirical evidence to the contrary, and the latter is founded only in words. It does not matter how personally protective of him you may feel, this is being doled out as life proven advice, and it is critical that everyone, no matter how much they think someone is a part of the community, be critical and naturally skeptical. Advice founded in success needs to demonstrate that success, and there is just nothing there beyond hand waving. There are no "facts", but just claims. Your demand that people shouldn't comment unless, effectively, they're a fan is simply outrageous and is the anti-HN. Someone donated lots of hours doesn't make their claims any more credible.

blumkvist 11y ago
I just wanted to chime in quickly. I've found much of the advice given by patio11 to be plain wrong in my experience. These conversations quickly fill up with Latin phrases barely copied out of wikipedia and I don't have the time or patience to discuss this with people I know nothing about. Take this as you wish, most of the stuff he says is exactly what a person looking in would THINK, but it is not the truth.
- kasey_junk 11y ago
  And maybe thats the difference between your experience and patio11's? He did take the time (and lots of it) to write up his advice (though if you read his earlier stuff it was much less advice and much more "here is this thing I'm doing, lets see if it works"). He also has near endless patience when discussing this stuff with others. It doesn't hurt that he is a persuasive writer, and it is a skill he has obviously and publicly worked at. I for one would love to hear an opposing viewpoint, especially if it could be as well written and the author allowed as much access as patio11 does.
- tptacek 11y ago
  Are you a consultant? What does your practice look like?
  - sfk 11y ago
    Perhaps not like this: https://blog.sucuri.net/2009/07/matasano-com-hacked.html https://blog.sucuri.net/2009/07/matasano-com-hacked.html
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Is that supposed to be clever? "Oh yeah? Oh yeah? Well... well, your Wordpress blog got hacked once." Sick burn.
  - blumkvist 11y ago
    Yes I am. I make analytics applications for sales&marketing departments. Forecasting/Simulation, Segmentation, Text analytics, etc. Typical client - establishment with 500-1000 employees. Projects are delivered to the clients as a SaaS solution, because they need maintenance. Quarterly invoices, 1 year minimum contract. Edit: more details

tptacek 11y ago

It's not at all thinly veiled. The account to which you're replying seems to have been created solely to harass him with.

irrigation 11y ago
Harass him? What an outrageously transparent attempt to prejudice the audience, which in this case happens to also be for your own benefit as well: Good judgment would have been that you should stay away from these threads (for those who don't know, tptacek is a cofounder, with patio11, of their "turn HN fame into value" startup), but instead you come rushing in guns blazing. I found the consulting story incredibly dubious. None of the facts meshed, and I find those sorts of pie in the sky stories to actually be destructive to people entering or in the industry. If you find skepticism "harassment" -- does fame on HN make one untouchable -- you have a very perverse sentiment of what that is.
- tptacek 11y ago
  Two more paragraphs and not a single testable claim. What's probably more important for HN to know is that almost every single comment in your comment history follows this pattern. It is, literally, all you come here to write about. Not what specifically you find misleading about Patrick's consulting advice, but simply that you find the whole concept of Patrick "dubious". Especially amusing: "actually typing comments in response to your anonymous character sniping" == "guns blazing". Pew! Pew!
  - irrigation 11y ago
    "Two more paragraphs and not a single testable claim." More attempts at prejudicing claims, which is sort of your comment habit. FACT: you are a cofounder with Patrick FACT: it would be good judgment for you to stay away from these threads. You lack good judgment. FACT: you are trying to lever HN fame into startup success FACT: Patrick's posts about consulting -- which sort of came out of nowhere, suddenly telling of incredible consulting success -- are extraordinarily atypical. The single and only support for them is you, and people who have never done consulting but imagine up some scenario where it seems reasonable. FACT: Those posts drew lead-up attention to "Starfighter", that startup that you are a partner in. I mean, it must be a sure win initiative if someone is going to eschew $50K/week consulting engagements (I saw the story linked far and wide, people amazed at the elite consultant earning that sort of rate) that are easy to come by for it. The audience lines up. Your tactic of simply dropping prejudicing claims gets a pass on here because you earned the "security guy" goodwill. On most sites you would have been exiled as a troll long ago.

davidw 11y ago

I've only met patio11 in person very briefly (thaks to rwalling's MicroConf), but everything I saw confirmed the idea that he's a very nice, helpful person.