Re:Booted out of Bootup Labs
by noonespecial on Thursday April 15, 2010 @04:02AM
(#1267263)
With a heavy hitting roster like this, it's hard to believe that a startup might bite the hand that feeds it (or at least used to feed it).
Sounds more like the hand that called the dog over with promises of bacon that wasn't there...
This is one of the most one-sided articles I've seen on RWW. Of all the comments here, they choose this one?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1266864
And they mentioned Robinson's "This is not how it went down" comment without the main substance of his post (which consisted only of small quibbles) -- or the responses to it.
And does the fact that there was a "a heavy hitting roster" backing Bootup make what was done any more excusable?
Re:Booted out of Bootup Labs
by realitycheques on Thursday April 15, 2010 @12:54PM
(#1268237)
Makes it worse! Think about it... would you let your name be used this way, and/or associate with a company that you wouldn't put your own money in when it was badly needed?
How to Burn Bridges with Bootup Labs and Other Investors
They're only investors if they actually invest money.
That, uh, reads a lot like Dana saying: "haha nub, you won't ever get investors now will you!"
Not exactly solid reporting :(
The article should be titled How to Burn Bridges with Blog Readers and Other Audience Members
Re:Booted out of Bootup Labs
by JeremyChase on Thursday April 15, 2010 @08:22AM
(#1267614)
That article was written simply to be link-bait. She is simply saying the opposite of everyone else to get people to look. Ignore it.
How to Burn Bridges with Bootup Labs and Other Investors
http://www.readwriteweb.com/start/2010/04/how-to-burn-bridge...