If you take DDG out it reads like "Why should I use <specific product>?", to which the creator/CEO/Owner of <specific product> can now answer with the complete marketing blurb he/she has ready, without guilt.
I also have seen that about some obscure AI-Algorithm and a question like "Why is <obscure algorithm> so superior?". To which the inventor of said algorithm had a few pages as a reply.
The question was asked on 2017-03-12. Weinberg didn't answer until 2018-01-24, 10 months later, after others had answered. After Weinberg answered others continued to add answers.
If it was a setup, they did a really good job of making it look like a "user finds question about something he has first hand knowledge of and answers" situation.
It's good to be cautious, but most of the time the monsters aren't actually coming to Maple Street.
What I wanted to say is, that as a reader the answer to the general question "Is product X good?" by the owner/creator/inventor of said product, adds little value. Because obviously the creator knows a lot about his/her product but is also very biased. And I can probably find the same arguments and thoughts somewhere on the product page itself.
Staged or not, if Gabriel's answer is factually accurate -- as it seems to be from a cursory look -- I don't see a problem here.
It's irrelevant if the question is being set-up or not for people wanting to know the difference between a search engine marketing itself for privacy, like DuckDuckGo, versus Google.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/34XxbRFe54FycoCDw/the-bottom...
I personally don't think there's anything "wrong" with it because the pros listed will most definitely be valid however as an outside user, I am interested in both the products and they are less likely to tout their own shortcomings.
DDG is my default search engine, and I only revert to Google very rarely. I'm happy DDG exists and want them to succeed. Yet I would take quite some issue with point 4 "We listen". They may very well listen more than the others, particularly Google who are renowned for being deaf. I've reported faults with bangs, instant answers or results to DDG with little effect weeks and weeks later. They also shut down their community for creating and fixing bangs and instant answers.
I can see the same strategy being useful to Quora who rely on search engine traffic. Sadly, the low signal/noise ratio of Quora, and encouragement of opinions (not that many SO answers aren't!) makes the content even more subjective.
But that is not the issue. The issue is that complete garbage answers get upvoted to the top too frequently. You actually have to dig very deep to find something interesting.
From what I have seen, this is what Quora is all about related on technology, basically a marketing platform for companies to spit their boilerplate marketing material.
The problem is that it is seriously blurring the line between advertising and unbiased(or less biased that an ad from the company) advice/comparison of search engines.
They could have stated up front in the response that they represent DDG, but they did not.
perhaps they thought it was unnecessary to repeat the information that sits just under the title:
"Gabriel Weinberg, CEO & Founder at DuckDuckGo (2008-present)"
As a business owner it's your responsibility to do whatever it takes to succeed. This harms no one.