News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by CurtHagenlocher on Thursday September 15, 2011 @10:51AM (#3000580)
It's a first-world problem, sure, but I'm seriously suffering from "Arrington F*ucking fatigue".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by gjm11 on Thursday September 15, 2011 @11:47AM (#3000802)
Then you should probably stop f*cking Arrington.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by cienrak on Thursday September 15, 2011 @10:44AM (#3000540)
The winner from this group receives the Disrupt Cup and $50,000, taking over possession from Disrupt New York winner Getaround. Without further ado, the runners-up is Prism Skylabs. And the winner is…Shaker! Disclosure: TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington is an investor in Prism Skylabs and is a pending investor in Shaker.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by 18pfsmt on Thursday September 15, 2011 @11:00AM (#3000616)
I'm not some Arrington fan, and I try to stay away from Beta's posts; but, if you watched the TCDisrupt coverage, Arrington was trying to invest in just about everything.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by sneak on Thursday September 15, 2011 @10:52AM (#3000587) 

  Serious question, not rhetoric: Why do people write "f*ck" whe they mean "fuck"?

  They ran his original, "fuck"-containing quote in the story, and "F*ck" in the headline.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by dfxm12 on Thursday September 15, 2011 @10:56AM (#3000608)
It's considered bad form to have profanity in headlines. Of course, having a minced oath like f*ck in its place kinda defeats the point...

I'd rather not have sensationalized headlines, but oh well.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by sneak on Sunday September 18, 2011 @05:53PM (#3011373)
Why is it considered bad form? Considered by whom?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by dfxm12 on Wednesday September 21, 2011 @09:38AM (#3021920)
By style guides, like the one by AP.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by darklajid on Thursday September 15, 2011 @10:57AM (#3000609)
Clbuttic problem of different (and sometimes hard to understand/judge) case of NSFW regulations maybe?

It makes no sense to me either, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by fferen on Thursday September 15, 2011 @12:25PM (#3000957)
And, of course, the submission title uses the entire word AND the asterisk, which is perhaps an attempt to poke fun? Or just a funny mistake.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by funkah on Thursday September 15, 2011 @10:50AM (#3000574)
The tech community deserve everything we get for letting this idiot clown rise to the top of our field. I wish I could stop hearing about him, but of course that will never happen.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Mike Arrington Introduces Us To the "First F*ucking Amend... by bdhe on Thursday September 15, 2011 @11:08AM (#3000643)
Let's not get into name-calling. I think HN usually agrees that despite his personality Arrington did definitely have the skills and contacts it took to "rise to the top" and carve out a niche for himself. If we choose to disagree with how he's using that advantage, we should come up with better and more constructive criticisms, perhaps discussions on how to ensure that publications like TC don't monopolize the tech journalism market at least in the Silicon Valley (people often forget how much of an echo chamber the Valley produces, even more so because of how closely everyone is connected through Twitter/Facebook/Google+ etc.).
[ Parent | on HN ]