I agree that it was gracious for him to respond, which is why I'm skeeved out by the "consistency" questions. The line between benign question and passive-aggressive accusation is 1 px solid #fefefe.
And I have a thing about us accidentally chasing primary actors in the tech community off of HN by acting like... you know... us.
Totally understand. It's hard not to pick a fight with people (DHH and Fried both) who stand by a "pick a fight" mantra -- but I'm trying my hardest to be nice regardless! I swear!
I agree…and I assure you I was solidly on the left side of that line. Thus, my best attempts at a "hey — peace, man" impression.
Re:Try to digest the Groupon story
by eurohacker on Friday June 03, 2011 @03:26PM
(#2617663)
as some papers seem to indicate - the guy sold some part of his Groupon shares during or before IPO,
so it fits his filosphy well - seems like he wants to get out of it slowly and profitably ..
Jason responded that his philosophy is "balance." That's all well and good, but is that consistent with his involvement in Groupon? That's how this originally came up.
Certainly he has been very gracious to respond at all, and I think he's convinced me (and hopefully others) that there is no necessary inconsistency in preferring balance for one's own company and rapid growth for another -- or simply acknowledging that even if one doesn't gel with another philosophy on rapid growth that one can still provide valuable advice on design, etc.
Is that consistent with his philosophy as stated in Rework? I'm still not sure...