Hacker News Reader

Comment by kenster07 | Hacker News Reader

I find the angry tone of this message to be misplaced and unnecessary.

Not really. If someone claims that their service will not be discontinued, unless they can offer some sort of agreement then it's worthless.

Not like they can't shutdown their company irrespective of any promises.

How about building it to be self-hosted and releasing under the AGPL license?

I also disagree with the tone but I understand the reason. They will gladly shut the service down once someone offers them enough money in aqui-hire.

    They will gladly shut the service down once someone offers them enough money in aqui-hire.

It's a bummer this is the status quo with startups. To me, it's the most disappointing thing about the tech world. I actually interviewed at other companies first, and only cofounded Inbox when I couldn't find anywhere else to solve this problem.

Probably the only convincing thing I can say is that if you wanted to build a company to flip quickly, an email infrastructure startup is certainly the most painful, masochistic way you could go about it. We spent the better part of last year reading RFCs and fixing tons of obscure bugs to get this far.

But if you don't plan to be acquired, why not sign a contract in that effect?

Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory in action. http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

Disagree. It's harsh to make a point that there is no evidence they're telling the truth, not to be edgy or get attention. It would be better without the 'shut up' but a bit of an 'angry' tone is fitting.

Really, I'm more uncomfortable with a link to a webcomic joke as an argument point...

I'm just citing where I got the 'theory.' The OP of the comment could have made their point just fine without being confrontational or 'angry' as you put it. I don't see why people are defending someone's rudeness, you can get your point across without being a jerk about it.

It's more subtle than that.

The 'shut up' detracts from the comment. Being a jerk is bad.

But being confrontational is in this case a benefit. The first line is "Your claim that your product will not be discontinued is worthless." This is confrontational in a good way, and this line is not being a jerk. It's pointing out a serious flaw without attacking anyone.

It could be phrased differently still without insinuating that what they say is worthless.

Something like, "How will you back up your claim of the product not being discontinued?" or "What will prevent your product from being discontinued?" Gets the same point across without coming off rude (it may just be me but saying "your claim ... is worthless" seems rude.) The OP of the comment definitely has a good point but it's said in a way that isn't constructive.

But that's precisely what he/she needed to insinuate. That claim is worthless to the users it's targeted towards.

Well, they release their code as AGPL ready to be self hosted. If that's not a guarantee about it not going away, I don't know what ever could be.

It's not even an argument point, but just being used as a way to call someone a name without owning it.

No it isn't. If I want to call the poster a fuckwad, I'll call him one. The only reason I linked the comic is because it may not be common knowledge to everyone where the 'theory' is from.

Then you're just poisoning the well with a bit of ad hominem (in a pretty stupid way), saying that someone else's opinion is wrong because they're anonymous when you're anonymous yourself.

Whatever it is, it's worthless.

You disingenuous bastard: "Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory in action"

You seriously don't think you called him a fuckwad?

That's the name of the 'theory' while it does imply that they're a 'fuckwad' (whatever that may be) it's not my chosen word to call them, I'm just citing it. But go ahead and defend the unnecessary rudeness and hide behind your throwaway account. I'll make it clear: The OP of the comment is being an asshole/fuckwad/douchebag/<insert word conveying sentiment here> by being needlessly rude due to the anonymity provided by having an online pseudonym.

Well, you've managed some consistency, then.

You are just as rude as the activity you're calling out. That's all I'm trying to say.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com