Aaron, I'm not sure why you think I don't approve comments that disagree with what I say — that's the point of blogging.
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I'd love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that's your right, but your first comment said this:
"I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I'm pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike."
As for taking money over valuable members, if that's what you're looking for then that's your right. We'd take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you're free to value money and people any way that you wish.
Aaron Brazell
· 3 years ago
Some of your post was objective. I also wrote my comment after first waking up and not fully digesting all of what you say.
As for taking money over valuable members
So now you say our members aren't valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We've said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
Mike Rundle
· 3 years ago
Aaron you obviously can't read:
"So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand."
You said you'd take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
"We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish."
All Comments
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I'd love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that's your right, but your first comment said this:
"I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I'm pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike."
As for taking money over valuable members, if that's what you're looking for then that's your right. We'd take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you're free to value money and people any way that you wish.
So now you say our members aren't valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We've said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
"So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand."
You said you'd take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
"We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish."
C'mon man, we're both using English here.