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

TechCrunch is a bully

lanewood.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–119 of 119 posts

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#111

Post by mark_l_watson »

I have called TechCrunch "assholes" twice on tweets in the last week or so (because I hate following a link to TC on my iPad and having to cancel the annoying nag popup to install their app; last time I could not get through to the article because of constant redirects back to the nag popup. Yuck.)

So, I might be a little prejudiced against TC right now, but even with that, I think the original article about Shirley Hofnstein was really mean spirited.

In any case, I usually do my web browsing on my iPad so I am not reading TechCrunch anymore anyway.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#112

Post by cpeterso »

se85 wrote: post #83
cpeterso wrote: post #66

I'm surprised there isn't a "Photoshop yourself with Shirley Hornstein" meme yet.

LMAO! Thats a really good idea!

Or better yet, Shirley Hornstein with unexpected people or places: Shirley Hornstein with Darth Vader. Shirley Hornstein with the Curiosity rover on Mars.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#113

Post by eevilspock »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #107
robomc wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it's self righteous, but yeah, basically. Most businesses in the world focus on products, customers and profitability, not trendy lines of funding (and the non-tech "startup" scene has notably better rates of success - no googles, just honest businesses that do useful things for more money than they spend). Regardless though, all businesses should think long and hard about hires, not just hire pointless peopl…

I think it is a fair point that many businesses focus on products, however it is also important to consider that many of those products have a 'fashion' aspect to them, which is to say they are potential 'fads.' Perhaps the poster child for such a business was the "Pet rock" business in the 70's where the 'product' was a rock in a nice package mocking practice of attempting to create a special identity around toys. I…

The 'ol if you can't beat 'em, join 'em argument, eh? Look where that logic has taken our society. Look at the state of our politics.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#114

Post by Evbn »

pi18n wrote: post #95
samstave wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with your not being on a side - my personal opinion is this: Techcrunch was founded and run by a douchebag - thus douchebaggery is in its DNA.

It's not even news. The sole purpose of TC is to get traffic for web apps that Arrington and other insiders have a personal stake in.

And the sole purpose of this site is...

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#115

Post by Evbn »

famousactress wrote: post #71
xo wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

using legality as an ethical corollary doesn't really cut it for me. you're invoking "the worst argument in the world" as seen here on hn. ( http://lesswrong.com/lw/e95/the_worst_argument_in_the_world/ ) now. there is a difference between those two articles. just ask yourself: who would i invest in? the guy deceiving to work more, or the guy working to deceive more? no contest.

You're absolutely right. Inferring legality==ethical is a fallacy and distraction. I got a bit of a twinge when writing that bit. I think the reason I left it in is because lots of lots of people do make that correlation, and I was asking a question about other people's opinions, not mine. It's frankly surprising (sadly) when folks don't equate law and ethics so I was surprised at the contrast here. It wasn't meant t…

Are you really a famous actress? If so, I would like you be a cofounder in my startup.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#116

Post by nfriedly »

Techcrunch dropped from one of my favorite sites to one that I actively avoid more than a year ago due to a number of the shenanigans they've pulled. I make special exceptions if someone I know is covered there, but other than that I basically avoid the site like the plague.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#117

Post by famousactress »

Evbn wrote: post #115
famousactress wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're absolutely right. Inferring legality==ethical is a fallacy and distraction. I got a bit of a twinge when writing that bit. I think the reason I left it in is because lots of lots of people do make that correlation, and I was asking a question about other people's opinions, not mine. It's frankly surprising (sadly) when folks don't equate law and ethics so I was surprised at the contrast here. It wasn't meant t…

Are you really a famous actress? If so, I would like you be a cofounder in my startup.

No. I feel like we both probably dodged a bullet here.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#118

Post by jazzdev »

samstave wrote: post #61
uid wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what the hell.. this thread is certainly being derailed very quickly. discredit the facts in the story, not the guy who hired the guy who used to run the site or whatever

"...not the guy who hired the guy who used to run the site or whatever" That is why we are referring to the DNA of the company... Meaning that its founder's character sets the tone for the future of the company... This is fact, as founders hire people whom they believe will carry on the traits they themselves want to instill in the company... Arrington, while successful, is a farking douchebag. The whole of techcrunc…

Maybe good scoops are more important than good spelling and grammar.

Re: TechCrunch is a bully

#119

Post by samstave »

jazzdev wrote: post #118
samstave wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...not the guy who hired the guy who used to run the site or whatever" That is why we are referring to the DNA of the company... Meaning that its founder's character sets the tone for the future of the company... This is fact, as founders hire people whom they believe will carry on the traits they themselves want to instill in the company... Arrington, while successful, is a farking douchebag. The whole of techcrunc…

Maybe good scoops are more important than good spelling and grammar.

That's ridiculous. When you are a tech news publication ostensibly worth millions, I, as a reader, have an expectation of editing and proof reading.

Otherwise I have much less respect for the professionalism of your outfit.

How can I take the authors on that site serious when they themselves can't even bother to read the crap they produce.

Post reply on HN