Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so sure it's this simple. The market is pretty large. Not everything needs to be so black and white.
I agree. I think Dustin has a lot left to show.
Who?
Svbtle now open to the public
31–40 of 50 posts
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I think Dustin has a lot left to show.
Who?
Dustin Curtis (http://dcvrt.is), creator of Svbtle.
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#33Oh well. I was looking forward to it but now I've got Ghost and it does pretty much everything I want it to.
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#34I wovld like to vse this or listen to Chvrches, but I gvess neither option is set in stone.
[deleted]
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who?
Dustin Curtis ( http://dcvrt.is ), creator of Svbtle.
http://dcurt.is - FTFY
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
This same comment, except replace "Svbtle" with "Facebook" back when they opened up registrations for college students outside the Ivy League. It's not too far off from the much ballyhooed Slashdot quote on the first ipod. No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame. http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ip...
What a brainfart of a comment. You are missing the point completely . Facebook isn't a publishing platform. Apple didn't undermine its best feature in existing product by introducing iPod.
What an unnecessarily mean-spirited comment. Did you really need to say your first sentence?
That being said, maybe you're missing the point. Maybe svbtle wants to be a mainstream publishing platform and is just bootstrapping its initial user culture by curating the users. Maybe not.
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#37Isn't this like shooting themselves in the foot? Svbtle exclusivity was the only differentiator, guaranteeing at least some quality of the content. Now it's gone and so Svbtle turns from a notable content source to just another blogging platform. What am I missing?
Nothing.
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
so does the last name, for some reason last name can't be blank, do we have to use our last names? it's not a must. why is it compulsory? I don't know why it's not public to some people, i just signed up it was not as cool as i expected http://ruky.svbtle.com/trying-my-thing-with-svblte
clearly, it's because they don't want royalty to join! ;) (AFAIK, most royal families dont have last names)
They do, they just don't use them everyday. E.g. the Tudors were called the Tudors because that was their surname. Current lot are the Windsors I think.
Re: Svbtle now open to the public
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
clearly, it's because they don't want royalty to join! ;) (AFAIK, most royal families dont have last names)
They do, they just don't use them everyday. E.g. the Tudors were called the Tudors because that was their surname. Current lot are the Windsors I think.
Yes they are. They changed their surname to Windsor after high anti-German sentiment during WW1. [1]
Prior to that they were the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha's.[2]
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Windsor [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Saxe-Coburg_and_Gotha#...