5 ms·

I'm not sure why you'd respond to rhetorical flair with more straight-faced explanations, perhaps the same reason you think there's protocol to acquisitions and

by madair 16y ago

I'm not sure why you'd respond to rhetorical flair with more straight-faced explanations, perhaps the same reason you think there's protocol to acquisitions and takeovers (edit: there's not, well, as much as love & war.) Conde Nast just embarrassed themselves with a large portion of their customers, and not just the ones at reddit. Cheezeburger guy jumps in with a brilliant move, and you question protocol and additionally seem upset if he's not actually expecting them to sell to him. And hardly an anonymous coward here, just following corporate protocol of our culture and keeping my job. Edit: Yes, yes, I know that their real customers are advertisers, and of course that's why they did it. That thinking misses the point that if there are no readers then there are no advertisers. Or if there is lower reader trust and esteem then there is similarly low advertiser trust and esteem. Jus sayin for the nitpickers who miss the wider point otherwise, poor habit that.

jacquesm 16y ago
> I'm not sure why you'd respond to rhetorical flair with more straight-faced explanations, perhaps the same reason you think there's protocol to acquisitions and takeovers. The fact that you think there is not means that you're just a poser pretending to be in the know. A party like Conde Nast may not be popular with the reddit crowd but to pretend they're just a bunch of clowns that would be swayed by a jerk move like this is simply stupid. If you think that there is no protocol to buying a business of this size try to take over even a very small website by announcing publicly that you are 'in talks' before receiving your first answer. Then you can tell me how well it worked. > Conde Nast just embarrassed themselves with a large portion of their customers, and not just the ones at reddit. Not really, Conde Nast has different priorities than reddit. This is unfortunate for reddit but then they should have done better research on who they were selling to. They differ in opinion on a lot of things, I would call it a 'rocky marriage' at least and possibly there are by now grounds for divorce. But overall I think the reddit guys have been creative enough to work their way around the rough edges and Conde Nast has behaved like a rather reluctant parent. It reminds me very much of the winamp takeover by AOL. > Cheezeburger guy jumps in with a brilliant move, What's brilliant about it? Offering to buy them out? If figure that if you're serious about something like that you go about it the diplomatic way, not the cowboy way. Unless of course you don't really want a deal. But, maybe pigs can fly, and maybe you are right. But I highly doubt it. I get approached on average 3 times per year to 'sell my company', I can tell just by the way in which I'm approached if someone is serious or not. And even if they are serious, we usually just end up chatting for a bit and then we both go our ways. If such a party would announce their intent in the media before sounding me out they might as well forget about approaching, especially if they're not nearly as well known as either the acquisition target or the seller. Then it looks like they're trying to gain publicity over my back. > and you question protocol and additionally seem upset if he's not actually expecting them to sell to him. Yep. It wastes bandwidth and gives this guy airtime that he shouldn't have. Unless, of course he really is serious and just hasn't figured out how to handle a situation like this. But as it is it just looks like a rather stupid ploy to get their attention in a negative way. The redditors (the subject of the sale here) must be wondering right now if it would be possible to find an even worse buyer than CN. > And hardly an anonymous coward here, just following corporate protocol of our culture and keeping my job. That's what I said. So you don't stand by your words after all. Just imagine your boss would read your writings, you might want to delete them, right? And your job is in M&A?
- madair 16y ago
  >>> The fact that you think there is not means that you're just a poser pretending to be in the know. Ah, yes, name calling, that will do it. >>> but to pretend they're just a bunch of clowns that would be swayed by a jerk move like this is simply stupid What, who, me? I'm pretending they would? >>> by announcing publicly that you are 'in talks' before receiving your first answer Wha...huh...business news...oh nevermind. >>> Then you can tell me how well it worked. Hurray! Some rhetorical flair! Now we're talking. >>> Conde Nast has behaved like a rather reluctant parent. It reminds me very much of the winamp takeover by AOL. Interest contrast between your expectations and sympathy for behavior of big business versus a little guy with a popgun (in the populist mind, that is). I'm sure you don't really feel the way implied or rather left out here, which is my point. >>> What's brilliant about it? A. publicity (do I really need to say that?) B. maybe he'll luck out and they'll actually sell (I doubt it but who knows) C. signaling. intentionality to purchase large web assets (perhaps something new for him, I'm not sure, I haven't followed the Cheezeburger business in the past couple years) Takeovers and acquisitions is a signaling game. >>> It wastes bandwidth Populist uprising doesn't necessarily rule out participation of business leaders. In fact, it often needs their help. Didn't waste my bandwidth, quite enjoyable really, too bad it wasted yours. (Edit, wait a sec, waste bandwidth? You're on a roll with lot of value judgments dude so this one slipped by me, quite off really. Popular though, gotta say that for ya, but then again the Tea Party is pretty popular too so doesn't mean that much.) >>> The redditors (the subject of the sale here) must be wondering right now if it would be possible to find an even worse buyer than CN The must huh? >>> That's what I said. So you don't stand by your words after all. Just imagine your boss would read your writings, you might want to delete them, right? There's no point arguing with this one, you'd like to think your experience and assumptions fit my situation, but sorry, nope. The rest, fine, but you should be ashamed of yourself for this part. Edit: I'm tempted to go back and count all the explicit and implied value judgments, logical fallacies, positions clearly based on your economic conditions or ideals. And it would be quite fun to ride through a deconstruction of your own condition compared with that of your ideals and opinions...but why oh why,
- madair 16y ago
  (I've been censored by the majority, or at least some people. My first comment fine, it was hyperbole but I like flair and more importantly I stand by my opinion on the issue and I think a quick perusal through business headlines will bear me out. But my approach was strong, I felt my reaction matched the outrageousness of the OP's comment, but I may have been wrong about that, I am certainly looking at that possibility. (But for the subsequent comments which I made I ask you to consider whether this system is working when it blocks actual dissenting opinion rather than trolling which this most certainly is not. Certainly people may not like the opinions and my dissent from what may be more widespread views, but as I understand that's not the purpose of this rating system.)

by madair 16y ago

jacquesm 16y ago

> I'm not sure why you'd respond to rhetorical flair with more straight-faced explanations, perhaps the same reason you think there's protocol to acquisitions and takeovers. The fact that you think there is not means that you're just a poser pretending to be in the know. A party like Conde Nast may not be popular with the reddit crowd but to pretend they're just a bunch of clowns that would be swayed by a jerk move like this is simply stupid. If you think that there is no protocol to buying a business of this size try to take over even a very small website by announcing publicly that you are 'in talks' before receiving your first answer. Then you can tell me how well it worked. > Conde Nast just embarrassed themselves with a large portion of their customers, and not just the ones at reddit. Not really, Conde Nast has different priorities than reddit. This is unfortunate for reddit but then they should have done better research on who they were selling to. They differ in opinion on a lot of things, I would call it a 'rocky marriage' at least and possibly there are by now grounds for divorce. But overall I think the reddit guys have been creative enough to work their way around the rough edges and Conde Nast has behaved like a rather reluctant parent. It reminds me very much of the winamp takeover by AOL. > Cheezeburger guy jumps in with a brilliant move, What's brilliant about it? Offering to buy them out? If figure that if you're serious about something like that you go about it the diplomatic way, not the cowboy way. Unless of course you don't really want a deal. But, maybe pigs can fly, and maybe you are right. But I highly doubt it. I get approached on average 3 times per year to 'sell my company', I can tell just by the way in which I'm approached if someone is serious or not. And even if they are serious, we usually just end up chatting for a bit and then we both go our ways. If such a party would announce their intent in the media before sounding me out they might as well forget about approaching, especially if they're not nearly as well known as either the acquisition target or the seller. Then it looks like they're trying to gain publicity over my back. > and you question protocol and additionally seem upset if he's not actually expecting them to sell to him. Yep. It wastes bandwidth and gives this guy airtime that he shouldn't have. Unless, of course he really is serious and just hasn't figured out how to handle a situation like this. But as it is it just looks like a rather stupid ploy to get their attention in a negative way. The redditors (the subject of the sale here) must be wondering right now if it would be possible to find an even worse buyer than CN. > And hardly an anonymous coward here, just following corporate protocol of our culture and keeping my job. That's what I said. So you don't stand by your words after all. Just imagine your boss would read your writings, you might want to delete them, right? And your job is in M&A?

madair 16y ago
>>> The fact that you think there is not means that you're just a poser pretending to be in the know. Ah, yes, name calling, that will do it. >>> but to pretend they're just a bunch of clowns that would be swayed by a jerk move like this is simply stupid What, who, me? I'm pretending they would? >>> by announcing publicly that you are 'in talks' before receiving your first answer Wha...huh...business news...oh nevermind. >>> Then you can tell me how well it worked. Hurray! Some rhetorical flair! Now we're talking. >>> Conde Nast has behaved like a rather reluctant parent. It reminds me very much of the winamp takeover by AOL. Interest contrast between your expectations and sympathy for behavior of big business versus a little guy with a popgun (in the populist mind, that is). I'm sure you don't really feel the way implied or rather left out here, which is my point. >>> What's brilliant about it? A. publicity (do I really need to say that?) B. maybe he'll luck out and they'll actually sell (I doubt it but who knows) C. signaling. intentionality to purchase large web assets (perhaps something new for him, I'm not sure, I haven't followed the Cheezeburger business in the past couple years) Takeovers and acquisitions is a signaling game. >>> It wastes bandwidth Populist uprising doesn't necessarily rule out participation of business leaders. In fact, it often needs their help. Didn't waste my bandwidth, quite enjoyable really, too bad it wasted yours. (Edit, wait a sec, waste bandwidth? You're on a roll with lot of value judgments dude so this one slipped by me, quite off really. Popular though, gotta say that for ya, but then again the Tea Party is pretty popular too so doesn't mean that much.) >>> The redditors (the subject of the sale here) must be wondering right now if it would be possible to find an even worse buyer than CN The must huh? >>> That's what I said. So you don't stand by your words after all. Just imagine your boss would read your writings, you might want to delete them, right? There's no point arguing with this one, you'd like to think your experience and assumptions fit my situation, but sorry, nope. The rest, fine, but you should be ashamed of yourself for this part. Edit: I'm tempted to go back and count all the explicit and implied value judgments, logical fallacies, positions clearly based on your economic conditions or ideals. And it would be quite fun to ride through a deconstruction of your own condition compared with that of your ideals and opinions...but why oh why,
madair 16y ago
(I've been censored by the majority, or at least some people. My first comment fine, it was hyperbole but I like flair and more importantly I stand by my opinion on the issue and I think a quick perusal through business headlines will bear me out. But my approach was strong, I felt my reaction matched the outrageousness of the OP's comment, but I may have been wrong about that, I am certainly looking at that possibility. (But for the subsequent comments which I made I ask you to consider whether this system is working when it blocks actual dissenting opinion rather than trolling which this most certainly is not. Certainly people may not like the opinions and my dissent from what may be more widespread views, but as I understand that's not the purpose of this rating system.)