Mom always said if you play with match.com, you're going to get burned.
Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B
141–144 of 144 posts
Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I were a judge, I'd only have a slightly more negative or skeptical attitude towards IAC/Match as a result of that PR statement, at best. I'm not buying the wisdom yet. Anyone have something more convincing? Or am I wrong about most judge's mindsets? Don't judges 'see through' PR? Isn't their job about facts, not being influenced by rhetoric? Are our judges crap? BTW, this is one reason why AI ought to assist judg…
I have no idea why this is downvoted, I think this is pretty profound. AI, or even sentiment analysis, could easily filter non-factual posturing from statements of objective fact. Of course, people can filter it too, you never see this type of crap slip in to an academic journal. I think if an AI auto-highlighted social-judgements it could revolutionize how a lot of things are read (a news article, HN, etc)
I will say (and this is meta), I'm more than happy to take a hit every now and then for the sake of how comments work here because after my experience on other tech news sites' comment sections (e.g. Ars Technica, sorry to name names) which are full of emotional hysteria, mob mentality, and upvote whoring, I've come to see that HN has by far the most quality Internet comment culture anywhere - I've never seen it on the Internet before in my 20 years. So I don't mind, let's keep commenting when and where we think we have something useful to say, and thinking freely and openly in a way that's pretty strongly protected by the excellent guidelines established here at HN.
Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B
#143That is a brutal response from Match and IAC. Their statement also mentions that two separate banks were part of the valuation. I'd be curious what their proof is. A couple fun phrases from the statement: > his merry band of plaintiffs > but sour grapes alone do not a lawsuit make
I worked for match group as a C-level executive and had a equity structure that was similar, but on a way smaller scale. They use outside firms and a methodology called baseball arbitration to come up with a FMV. Although I didn't like some of the decisions that impacted the value of my equity, I was always treated fairly.
> with a FMV
What's a FMV? F*ck My Valuation?
/joke
I think it's a for fair market value?
Re: Tinder founders sue parent companies Match and IAC for at least $2B
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of the best HN has to offer in terms of interesting and thought provoking discussion is on generic tangents, and so long as the discussion remains civil and contained to those threads concerning it I see no reason to discourage it for being discussed.
I know how unsatisfying this is going to sound, but: this is a point on which we just have to pull rank. It's our job to foster the kind of site where signal/noise ratio doesn't completely suck, and many years of experience have taught us that generic tangents lead to low-quality discussions that grow like weeds.
I don't think I agree with you, but I want to make sure I understand what you're saying before I go down that route here. What exactly do you mean by a "generic tangent"? You originally said "political", but now you say "low-quality"? Are political discussions inherently low quality, or is low-quality in this context in addition to it being political in nature?