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

Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

37signals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 147 posts

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#91

Post by Semiapies »

Gibbon wrote: post #78
Semiapies wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was slanderous (or, since it was written, libelous) about anything in the blog post? Very simply, GS set up web pages where they appeared to represent another company in a detrimental way. That is not something the other company is obligated to quietly request them to stop - they are well within their rights to open up with a cease & desist order, not an annoyed blog post.

For starters he implied (and borderline accused) GetSatisfaction of blackmail and extortionist practices.

Libel has to be a lie. Someone harshly laying out their opinion on a business's practices and saying those practices resemble extortion isn't even in the running for libel unless s/he says something factually untrue about those practices. Opinions aren't libelous.

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#92

Post by mechanical_fish »

webwright wrote: post #76
tptacek wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about this: what's an honest answer about how pissed you'd be if: (1) I was the top Google search result for "RescueTime security" (2) That page linked to a site where I collected security reports from end-users. (3) That page had your logo on it. (4) That page had copy that might suggest RescueTime didn't take the security of your customer's data seriously. We've established that you'd come talk to me first (act…

Why are you creating a hypothetical situation about security? Seems like a hypothetical situation about customer support would be more appropriate. The answer is (for customer support)-- moderately. But the question is: What's the goal with a response? To make them suffer? Or to fix it? How does it benefit my business to invest extra time/money to make another company suffer? I think the grown up / smart way to respo…

What's the goal with a response?

As I've said elsewhere in this thread: To reach the people -- potentially thousands of people -- who cared enough to type the name of your company into a search engine, but who then read some misleading but official-looking information, came away thinking that your company is kind of lame, and will never be heard of again unless you act.

Just because your prospective customers are invisible to you doesn't mean that they don't matter.

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#93

Post by plusbryan »

swombat wrote: post #12

I think it's quite bad form to publicly attack another company like this without discussing it in private first. I see no indication that there was any communication between 37Signals and GetSatisfaction prior to this very public post. I've had this kind of thing done to me before, and I think it's really out of order. Essentially, 37Signals have decided, in this case, to trade politeness and "being good" for making…

The handful of times I've contacted getsatisfaction, they've responded quickly and like a startup that cares about its customers and what they think. I agree this could have been emailed first.

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#94

Post by pietro »

swombat wrote: post #12

I think it's quite bad form to publicly attack another company like this without discussing it in private first. I see no indication that there was any communication between 37Signals and GetSatisfaction prior to this very public post. I've had this kind of thing done to me before, and I think it's really out of order. Essentially, 37Signals have decided, in this case, to trade politeness and "being good" for making…

Did you discuss this in private with 37signals before attacking them in public?

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#95

Post by chris11 »

oldwesley wrote: post #42
lsb wrote: post #2

It sounds more like fraud and misrepresentation.

An enterprising lawyer could put together a compelling class action case if only GetSatisfaction's pockets weren't so shallow. I'd like to see them get their asses handed to them for this shit.

You are not the only one. Supposedly someone is offering to pay 25k to a fund in support of a class action lawsuit. http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1650-get-satisfaction-or-...

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#96

Post by Semiapies »

I'm a bit amazed by a lot of these responses. I sympathize with the idea that problems should be worked out with friendliness and civility, but this sort of thing is not a question of etiquette that Fried mishandled. These are actions by Get Satisfaction that could easily lead to serious lawsuits.

I suggest that folks in web businesses who look at this and see the major concern here as the tone of an aggrieved blog post should make sure they have good lawyers to run their ideas by.

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#98

Post by tomsaffell »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #82
wheels wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loud public fuss is usually a reasonable backup plan if asking them to change doesn't work, but starting off by asking people to resolve something lends you credibility because you've tried to resolve things amicably. If you want to put a squeeze on them, you can add, "Or we're going to lambaste you in our popular blog." But starting off that way is just obnoxious. Granted, as noted, being obnoxious drives page views…

Loud public fuss is usually a reasonable backup plan if asking them to change doesn't work. You still haven't grasped the problem. I'm sure that 37signals could easily have used quiet channels to remove the offending pages, messages, and marketing copy on GetSatisfaction. But that would not have reached me . Up until three hours ago I was wandering through the world, with a faint memory of the time that I followed a…

Not every wrong in the world needs to be righted. Sometimes righting an old wrong creates a new wrong. Personally, I find new wrongs to be more costly than old ones.

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#99

Post by Semiapies »

jrockway wrote: post #97

What's the difference between something like this and Yelp? (Why is this bad, and Yelp's not? Is it because people here all have online businesses, and don't want a forum where people could say something bad about them?)

Because when I go to Yelp and look up Morton's Steakhouse in Atlanta GA, I see clearly marked reviews, not "Complaint Department and Feedback for Morton's Steakhouse". I don't see ads for Morton's competitors that only go away if Morton's sends Yelp money.

Seriously, you might find the linked blog post interesting.

Re: Jason Fried: Get Satisfaction is "awfully close to blackmail"

#100

Post by Gibbon »

Semiapies wrote: post #91
Gibbon wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For starters he implied (and borderline accused) GetSatisfaction of blackmail and extortionist practices.

Libel has to be a lie . Someone harshly laying out their opinion on a business's practices and saying those practices resemble extortion isn't even in the running for libel unless s/he says something factually untrue about those practices. Opinions aren't libelous.

In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. It is often, but not always, a requirement that this claim be false, and, or alternatively, that the publication is made to someone other than the person defamed.
Post reply on HN