131–140 of 186 posts
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
WOuldn't proof of that be some grounds for breach of fiduciary duty?
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So Nate & Co sell out to a big corporation then are upset that it does big corporation stuff? I'm more mad at Nate here because 538 was my go-to for political coverage pre-sellout, and because of his greed it went away.
Just follow the man, not the brand. He’s still doing his thing: https://www.natesilver.net/
He’s a sellout at heart, including his recent association with Polymarket.
Someone cool would have never sold out a website as good as 538 used to be. Now he’s more interested in profiting off of gamblers.
> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. --Nate Silver (538 founder) ABC seem pretty petty here.
It seems silly at best to take that as a literal statement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever you feel about his actions that was at worst it was a win-lose decision. He benefited from it. If his comment is accurate, then ABC’s decision is a clear lose-lose decision driven entirely by personal spite.
Honestly is Nate even wrong here? IIRC, he got to keep all of the models and etc from 538 which is kinda all that mattered about it. Like anybody is really going to lookup the 2016 election in 2030 but they're definitely want the model's output in 2030 for 2030. Management seems to be clearly inept and if somebody wants to give you a wheelbarrow of cash for something worthless you're generally foolish to not accept.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just follow the man, not the brand. He’s still doing his thing: https://www.natesilver.net/
But he kind of sucks and isn’t worth following. He’s a sellout at heart, including his recent association with Polymarket. Someone cool would have never sold out a website as good as 538 used to be. Now he’s more interested in profiting off of gamblers.