Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
jonathanstark.com
Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
1–10 of 75 posts
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#2Here's the previous story, since Jonathan didn't link to it in his blog.
How to use Jonathan's card to buy yourself an iPad - http://sam.odio.com/2011/08/12/i-took-625-jonathans-card/
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#3It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with:
I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it.
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#4It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with: I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it. In the light of what happened, you can say a lot of negative things about Sam Odio, but at least he's consistent.
it looks like he took the olive branch and shoved it up Sam's ...
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#5It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with: I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it. In the light of what happened, you can say a lot of negative things about Sam Odio, but at least he's consistent.
I don't agree with what Sam Odio did initially, but I also wouldn't exactly call publishing a screenshot of a private email from someone the "high road".
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#6It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with: I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it. In the light of what happened, you can say a lot of negative things about Sam Odio, but at least he's consistent.
Hm, I guess a lot can get lost in translation. :(
That "olive branch" comment wasn't intended to be negative. I was saddened by his reply. To address your point: I am not looking for a personal confrontation...just wanting to reach out and make sure he's OK.
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#7It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with: I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it. In the light of what happened, you can say a lot of negative things about Sam Odio, but at least he's consistent.
I don't agree with what Sam Odio did initially, but I also wouldn't exactly call publishing a screenshot of a private email from someone the "high road".
There was no private content in that mail. The whole of it could be expressed as "LOL UMAD?". I don't think I would have responded so kindly in Jonathan's place. I probably would have taken this as an opportunity to tell Sam Odio what I really think of his actions. So, yes, compared to that Jonathan absolutely took the high road. But also from a philosophical perspective, redirecting this toward the public participants of the card experiment was absolutely the right thing to do.
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#8It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with: I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it. In the light of what happened, you can say a lot of negative things about Sam Odio, but at least he's consistent.
Hm, I guess a lot can get lost in translation. :( That "olive branch" comment wasn't intended to be negative. I was saddened by his reply. To address your point: I am not looking for a personal confrontation...just wanting to reach out and make sure he's OK.
why are you saddened by his reply?
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#9I'm finding myself in a significant minority here, which is always an interesting time to stand back and reflect. I hope this post doesn't come off as a troll; I am genuinely curious where my beliefs diverge from the majority.
I cannot understand why Sam's charity raising has raised such an outrage. Here is why.
First, what he did was within the bounds of the experiment. Johnathan provided the Starbucks card to be used in any way people saw fit. Did he take advantage of some flaws within the system? Sure. Did he use it for something that it wasn't expected to be used for? Yes. But that makes him sound closer to a hacker than a thief to me. [1]
Second, this outcome is significantly better than what had before been believed when the $100 drops were noticed on the account. Most people (myself included) figured people were just lifting money from the account for their own means. On the moral spectrum, donating money is about as far away as possible from that suspicion.
The facebook page also fails to elucidate me.
Someone says (paraphrase) "no one should be able to appoint himself the arbiter of how someone else's money should be spent." But isn't Jonathan (or perhaps the Starbucks corporation) dictating this by requiring them to put money on a Starbucks Card - not a VISA card, for instance?
Another person says (paraphrase) "Sam is donating other people's money without their consent." Didn't people give up any control they had over their money by putting it on Jonathan's card in the first place?
Or maybe it's just because (paraphrase) "Sam is flaunting how smart of a hacker he is." If so, I missed it.
To be honest, and unless someone can point out where I am wrong, what Sam has done impresses me more than the initial concept of the card itself. If I had donated $10 to the card and it had instead gone to charity, I would have been fine.
[1]: One definition of hacker: "A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and stretching their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary." Taken from the Jargon File.
Edit: One last thing. I tried to make this post as anti-inflammatory as possible, and if you think I failed, please let me know why.
Re: Jonathan Stark responds to Sam Odio
#10It's an interesting character study. Jonathan takes the high road and redirects Sam Odio to the public discussion which I think is a great thing to do instead of getting caught up in a personal confrontation. Then Sam Odio responds with: I think you took my olive branch and stomped on it. In the light of what happened, you can say a lot of negative things about Sam Odio, but at least he's consistent.
Hm, I guess a lot can get lost in translation. :( That "olive branch" comment wasn't intended to be negative. I was saddened by his reply. To address your point: I am not looking for a personal confrontation...just wanting to reach out and make sure he's OK.
I think the olive branch comment is consistent because it conveys an absolute lack of insight into the way your actions are perceived by other people.
Sam, the things you wrote on your blog regarding the whole incident left me speechless at first. It wasn't just because of what you did, it was the tone of superiority and confidence you exhibited throughout that made me really angry - angry enough to attack you very harshly in the other thread. I'm not a confrontational person either by any means, but this actually made me mad enough to explode like that in public. I can only try to imagine how it must have felt for Jonathan.
If you're saddened by his reply, that means you still don't understand the moral bankruptcy of your position. Sam, what you did saddened a lot of people. I believe in the end, it's not Jonathan you need to reach out to, it's your own moral compass.