This is a recurring theme of these sorts of replies (along with cries of jealousy or ad hominem attacks by people circling the wagons). "Factual", when the things I am questioning are based upon no demonstrated facts at all.

patio11 gave advice on consulting which, as a long time consultant -- rather successfully (but still not enough to start doling wisdom) -- I found completely at odds with the reality I've endured, but it's a big world so maybe I just fly in different circles. It was advice being conveyed to people looking to enter or already in the game, and is purportedly based upon real world success and feedback.

My first suspicion is that it's a piece obviously intending to draw attention to his newest venture (Starfighter, just as so many prior pieces were driven to focus SEO and attention on BCC, though we've seen that the return on that was miserable for the time invested and opportunity lost). That's always a warning side -- people often tend to aggrandize when seeking attention and link juice (and to find pat, sure-fire success formulas, because easy solution posts do best), and coincidentally that piece was linked to far and wide for the extraordinary claims. The second is that it is building a reputation at the cost of just words, which you can see throughout this thread: "Well BCC [a project that has seen so little success most people would have abandoned it long ago] was just for fun. He's really a super successful consultant." Because, the story goes, he was picking and choosing among clients shoveling money at him. $30K per week? $40K? Why not $50K? Just keep those rates hidden and escalating, biding your time and soon enough the money truck starts dumping.

First they were successful for being an expert at optimizing a business. Now they're a high flying, top tier consultant that was so successful they hung up the hat.

Are those facts? The former we have empirical evidence to the contrary, and the latter is founded only in words. It does not matter how personally protective of him you may feel, this is being doled out as life proven advice, and it is critical that everyone, no matter how much they think someone is a part of the community, be critical and naturally skeptical. Advice founded in success needs to demonstrate that success, and there is just nothing there beyond hand waving. There are no "facts", but just claims.

Your demand that people shouldn't comment unless, effectively, they're a fan is simply outrageous and is the anti-HN. Someone donated lots of hours doesn't make their claims any more credible.