This post has kinda been stewing since I first Dave Winer’s post yesterday where he first preformed a drive-by character assassination without being man enough to use the real names of those involved (for the record it was about Gabe Rivera and Michael Arrington) and then went on to generally berate everyone who takes up the challenge to write down their thoughts on a daily basis about technology.
As far as Dave is concerned that unless you have taken computer science or have written code you should keep your mouth shut. Screw you Dave – I have taken courses and I have written code and I have never found that either of those two things have had any impact whatsoever on what I write about. Just because someone hasn’t written code doesn’t mean they don’t have valid viewpoints about Web 2.0, social networks or even whether a browser looks and acts like a piece of shit.
I’m sorry but this post was even more of linkbait in my opinion that the TechCrunch post you turned your pompous nose up at. As Frederic at The Last Podcast said in his post on this
But here is why I think this doesn’t make sense: technology isn’t just about code, it’s about users and enabling users (and doesn’t that sound like something Dave would say himself?). Those users can (and should) happily write about their experiences and I for one am glad Techmeme picks up on that.
Maybe you’ve been spending too many years on that high horse of yours Dave to see that more often these days you doing more to prove how much of a donkey’s ass you are instead of the thought leader you once were.
Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?
Tweet
I just read about this myself and I'm also in agreement with you and Frederic. Just like Frederic, I took CSC for two years and switched out of it last year. It's not a particular area of tech that I have a passion for.
He's definitely a dick for saying that and I don't understand the logic behind the statement one bit.
Tell us how you feel, Steven!
In my case, I let the comment go in one ear and out the other, even though the last time I coded professionaly I was coding in HyperTalk.
Although it is interesting to note that he looks at the Twitter brownout as a technical issue; I see it as a business issue.
I wish I could rant about this like you do – but of course I fully agree. I was actually surprised nobody else had picked up on the story yet… or maybe we just fell for Dave's linkbait…
I think there is some credibility to both your article and Dave's. There are two main focuses to Dave's comments and you are only focusing on one. The one that you are ignoring is important and he has a point.
I think that writing an article about the “Top Tech Writers” with the “Top” being culled from a single source that is based on an algorithm does seem to be kind of one sided. Just because an algorithm decides that one person or site is “hotter” than another doesn't mean that the site is “top” in quality. Now if such a list was culled from say, TechMeme, Digg, Google Reader, and other sites then run through some kind of algorithem that included a bunch of sources, I'd say there's an argument to be made against some of Dave's statements.
The problem is that a lot of people look at TechCrunch with a high level of authority. So when they write a “Who are the Top Tech Writers” it can become problematic when they base their story off a single source that is based on a computer programmed algorithm.
However, I have not take a computer science course in college, but I have written code. So I can definitely understand why/how neither of those “prerequisites” should be nessecary for writing on technology. I have followed technology for almost 2 decades now and I would say I'm just as “educated” in such matters.
mkoby – hang on a second please. I do not necessarily disagree with the “Top
Tech Writer's” at all. What I do not like is the cowardly way in which he
tried to bitchslap Gabe and Michael – or that he holds such a high opinion
of himself that he thinks only people like him should be commenting or
having opinions about technology.
If he had left it at raising questions about the TechCrunch post itself that
would have been fine and I am sure at one time Dave might actually have been
able to construct a fine argument against it .. but I think those days are
beginning to fade.
You totally missed the point you're so fixated on using tushy language.
That's cool
I just wanted to make sure that one of Dave's points didn't get undermined in all the hoopla about his other comments. Because he does actually bring up a valid point in his rant. He just took it to a level that we all agree he shouldn't have.
I completely agree with your points about what he said with regards to “needing to take CS and write code, etc” to be able to comment on technology.
And there's too much inbreeding going on over there, and you're all too chickenshit to say so. You can score a few points with Unca Mike by calling me schoolyard names, but that just covers up a very weak position. Fact is:
1. They were roommates.
2. Mike and his employees all show up at the top of the list.
3. No one has any idea what the criteria are except Gabe and the people Gabe tells.
4. I wonder if Gabe tells Mike? Just a question.
5 And then the new list was posted by who? Someone who works for Mike!
If I'm the only one that noticed all that incest you all need some new glasses. Truth is you all probably *did* notice it but didn't have the guts to say it.
So my headline if I gave a shit about your personality flaws (I don't) would be “WinExtra is chickenshit.”
But you wont' see that on Scripting News. I'm too busy figuring out new stuff to do. Why don't you do the same? Why do you have so much time to bitch and moan (not you mkoby, I'm talking to the Winextra asswiper).
Excuse me Dave but if I can call you out with a headline calling you a
pompous ass or be willing to tell Fred Wilson in an older post to kiss my
ass or at one point called the CrunchGear frat pack to account then I really
don't think I would have any problem giving the smack down to anyone on the
TechCrunch crew or call Gabe to task if I felt something was wrong.
So don't try and get my goat by calling me a chickenshit and really I
couldn't careless what you title your posts or the fact that you think I
have personality flaws – which I probably do – so what at least I don't go
around constantly puffing myself up.
I sure hope your new stuff works well for you I really do regardless of
whether you think I'm an asswiper.
Yeah show us your stuff big boy, I say you're chickenshit, chickenshit.
Maybe so but at least I use the persons real name when I am calling them out
or giving them a slap. Your pathetic attempt to call two people's character
into question without naming them is far more chickenshit than anything I
could do.
Hey asshole, that's a clue that I wasn't doing any of that bullshit.
You're so pathetic you have to make stuff up to be pissed about.
are you done yet Dave?
or do you want to continue to embarass yourself with this verbal temper
tantrum that is only showing the you need to get your meds refilled.
*YAWN*
Steven, I love the title of this post. Not much more needs to be said about Dave Winer. He is an intelligent person, usually with creative ideas, but when he starts spouting opinions, his approach is horrid, sometimes changing into outright hostility towards whoever has earned his wrath that day.
which I seem to have
Oh well just another day as the blogosphere turns …
Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer were college roommates. They both got rich too. I am not seeing conspiracy there either.
Tech Crunch doing Gabe a favor and drumming up some traffic for him and TC on a slow weekend? Does it really matter? Can't we just, you know, use our own judgment to figure stuff like that out. If you think it really matters, that's fine. But lots of successful business people who got rich did so on the basis of relationships they formed — even with college roommates.
With 99 percent of the world not caring about TC, and 99.9 percent not caring about TechMeme, is it really that scandalous?
I'm pretty sure Hodson trashes me fairly regularly.
all are equal under the Law of the Cranky
Dave: nice job! How about a few more enumerated points? You know, a #6, #7, #8… You're so close to a breakthrough, I can sense it!
he got sidetracked by the chickenshit meme … so much for multitasking
are you done yet Dave?
or do you want to continue to embarass yourself with this verbal temper
tantrum that is only showing the you need to get your meds refilled.
*YAWN*
Pros: Dave Winer's always consistant. The fact that he's an actual innovator lends him credibility.
Cons: Who the flying fuck gives two shits about who links to who and who doesn't? I'm more interested in seeing the next Twitter or the next Flickrfan than any of this nonsense.
Dave, who doesn't miss your point?
Steven, I love the title of this post. Not much more needs to be said about Dave Winer. He is an intelligent person, usually with creative ideas, but when he starts spouting opinions, his approach is horrid, sometimes changing into outright hostility towards whoever has earned his wrath that day.
which I seem to have
Oh well just another day as the blogosphere turns …
Oh geez, I thought we were having fun until now. Okay — I'm done. Take care and good luck.
all are equal under the Law of the Cranky
he got sidetracked by the chickenshit meme … so much for multitasking
Cranky as advertised.
Is this the part where all is forgiven and everyone goes out for beers?
right on .. who's buying?
Cranky as advertised.
Is this the part where all is forgiven and everyone goes out for beers?
mmmmm….beer
mmmmm….beer
Can I vote for:
Arrington's a know-nothing prick
Winer's a know-a-little prick who takes credit for “inventions” that are mostly retarded and obvious, and has since held up advances more than he ever helped
?
Is that an option?
sure if you want
sure if you want