Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 218 posts

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#111

Post by pjscott »

marknutter wrote: post #83
jackowayed wrote: post #12

That's pretty linkbaity. Dropping a "nuclear bomb" would be something like, "I have a recording from the Bin 38 meeting that proves you were colluding. The FTC will start examining it at 9am sharp tomorrow morning." Sure, it's unusual for someone to so strongly come out and call people out, especially people that he may want to invest alongside someday, but "nuclear bomb" is a serious stretch.

Right. He's used up his "nuclear bomb" title for the year. What happens when something truly scandalous happens? I suppose he could go up to hydrogen bomb..

Above that are Tsar Bomba, small asteroid, large asteroid, and antimatter bomb. If events get much more shocking, then we go up to disastrously-located black holes and self-replicating berserker swarms. After that, I guess all that's left is the ultimate menace of a superintelligent and profoundly alien AI that cares only about maximizing the number of paperclips in the universe.

What I'm saying here is that Michael Arrington has plenty of room left for hyperbole, even now.

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#112

Post by tomhoward »

ojbyrne wrote: post #65
mhartl wrote: post #22

Two reactions: (1) Ron Conway is a man of great integrity. (2) It's astonishing and fascinating that the world's most prolific angel investor apparently doesn't know how to spell "entrepreneur". But he sure has helped a lot of them, and that's what really matters.

The President of the United States managed to miss the fact that the word derives from french.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/bush.asp

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#113

Post by pjscott »

Devilboy wrote: post #58
zaidf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

does he not have an extra 2-3 minutes to capitalize and think out more coherent analogies? The same way, I fail to realize how people don't understand that he writes in that style not because he lacks a few extra minutes but because that is a style and persona he's built over time.

'Asshole' is not a style

I read his style as "wide-eyed guy staring at you and monologuing intensely, with a somewhat unhinged demeanor and odd vocal inflections." The erratic capitalization contributes a lot to that.

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#115

Post by invisible »

zaidf wrote: post #71
Devilboy wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Asshole' is not a style

Don't listen to rap, then. Stick with pop.

There is a difference between "being real" and "being an idiot." I don't want to have an idiot involved in my company, so acting like one on your blog seems dumb.

http://www.snoopdogg.com/news/ http://www.trapmuzik.com/news/ http://www.outkast.com/news

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#116

Post by adammichaelc »

credo wrote: post #110
adammichaelc wrote: post #5

My paraphrased short version: Ron Conway to the super-angels: I'm in this game because I love seeing entrepreneurs build cool stuff. You guys aren't. Stop worrying about term sheets and valuations and worry about adding value beyond cash. I've wanted to say this for a long time, but have bit my lip in your presence. I no longer want to be involved with any of you. And Dave McClure, quit being a classless embarrassmen…

That is a good summary. However, I'm surprised that so many other comments talk about Conway rocking, being a great individual etc. When I read his email, my thought was that the email was a great image-building propaganda tool and that he wrote it with the knowledge that the email would be made public. His email talks how great he is, how he loves entrepreneurs and how other investors are in it for self-serving fact…

I would have similar doubts about Conway's authenticity here except that doesn't fit with what I've heard pretty much everywhere else about the kind of person he is to do deals with and work with.

Maybe he wouldn't have written that email if this story hadn't been aired. Maybe he would have. But the email fits with his past actions, so to me it doesn't matter.

My guess is that he knew the email would be aired, and he wrote it to entrepreneurs as much as to the super-angels. His brand is all about trust-with-entrepreneurs, and if he loses that his deal-flow gets severely cut down.

To solidify that trust, he publicly threw down the line in the sand and said, "I'm on the entrepreneur's side. Always. I'm even willing to give up friendships / partnerships with these other investors to prove that loyalty."

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#117

Post by akjetma »

HowardRoark wrote: post #67

Ron Conway rocks but the email almost feels like it was intended to be leaked.

He also could have been the one to tip Arrington to the meeting in the first place. Then, after alleging that it was one of the others who had tipped Arrington, he inspires mistrust among the colluding angels. This is all speculation, obviously, and a little too ''evil' mastermind' to be based on reality, I think.

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#118

Post by bl4k »

marknutter wrote: post #83
jackowayed wrote: post #12

That's pretty linkbaity. Dropping a "nuclear bomb" would be something like, "I have a recording from the Bin 38 meeting that proves you were colluding. The FTC will start examining it at 9am sharp tomorrow morning." Sure, it's unusual for someone to so strongly come out and call people out, especially people that he may want to invest alongside someday, but "nuclear bomb" is a serious stretch.

Right. He's used up his "nuclear bomb" title for the year. What happens when something truly scandalous happens? I suppose he could go up to hydrogen bomb..

MG has only used it once before:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&#3...

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#119

Post by j_baker »

spoondan wrote: post #93
j_baker wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McClure's response wasn't defensive. Defensive would have been keeping quiet and not admitting to have been there in the first place.

Calling TechCrunch's reporting a "bullshit superangel conspiracy theory" is, if nothing else, a prime example of defensiveness.

No, that's disagreement. People who have something to hide usually don't draw attention to themselves.

Re: Ron Conway Drops A Nuclear Bomb On The Super Angels

#120

Post by techiferous »

cookiecaper wrote: post #74
staunch wrote: post #10

He knows more about how these guys act behind closed doors than absolutely anyone. I think it's official now: these guys were being bad and they got an appropriate bitch slap. Hopefully that's the end of it. I'm sure none of them are genuinely bad guys. There's probably just a side of some of them that's a bit greedy and stupid. Hopefully this will be the lesson they all need to keep that side suppressed permanently.

Why are you so sure their intentions are pure or that "none of them are genuinely bad guys"? Do you know the people that were there well? If you don't, you're not really qualified to say this. People put a lot of time into image and posturing and often it has little to do with what's really under the surface. If they are in actually involved in illegal collusion, they should be charged and prosecuted. I don't think i…

"genuinely bad guys"

Here's my take: generally, people and life situations are very complex and the reality is that people don't neatly fall into categories of "good guys" or "bad guys".

Zoroastrianism really emphasized individual responsibility and thinking of individuals as good or bad. This made its way into Judaism and then spread into Christianity and Islam. Since our heritage as a nation is Christian, we have picked up this paradigm of thinking in terms of "good guys" and "bad guys". It also features heavily in our storytelling (movies). It's so much a part of our way of looking at the world that we actually think it's real.

tl;dr: People are too complex to be labeled "good" or "bad".

Post reply on HN