You are correct, I work in PR. The reason you know this is because I've provided a reasonable level of transparency in my profile. Additonally, I use my real name as my user name becuase I want to be held accountable for what I say.
If I ever lied to a reporter it would end my career. I'm sorry if you felt like I was attacking you, I wasn't. I was debating the merit of your arguements, which is lost now because you continuously edit them.
Public relations has nothing to do with attacking people. The 150 people I work with would be highly offended if I told them that we lie by trade - it is simply not the case.
Do I exaggerate? Yes, but who doesn't? I'd wager the best YC applications contain a degree of hyperbole, because no one wants to get involved with something that isn't exciting.
Finally, words are the simplest way to express logic, so I'm glad we could find some common ground. If you go back and read my original comment you'll see I wasn't attacking you. I wasn't even disagreeing with you. I was simply adding my insight to your original post, which is lost now because you continue to edit or delete what you say. I'm not going to debate this any further with you, because I am starting to feel foolish being dragging into this.
So again, I am sorry if you felt attacked, that was not my intention.
Best wishes,
Clinton
PS - I've taken the liberty of copying and pasting your post below so you won't feel compelled to edit it.
0 points by voiceofreason 10 hours ago | link | parent
How DARE you call me a liar? You work in a PR firm, so you use WORDS. I use LOGIC.
The point of my thread was that the author was being a jerk to Paul and should apologize. When I posted the quote where it's clear the author is insulting Paul, you got all uppity about it.
"your initial comment said that the author should apologize for comparing Paul to the musician."
At what point did I deny that I "compared Paul to the musician?" I never claimed I never said that. I simply replied to you and posted his quote you might have missed where the author said "YC is a waste of time" and also says, Paul is a bull who speaks "shit". That's why I said the author should apologize.
The author obviously meant to say Steve instead of Paul, in the intro. I didn't confuse that part of the article like you arrogantly believed. The reason I compared the two is because the user shows disdain and hate for the YC, so much he even confused his friend and Paul's names, when the two had nothing to do with one another.
You work in public relations so you're probably very good at attacking people. You're a liar and exaggerate by trade.
Do you understand it now? Or are you attacking me just because you're a PR person trying to test your training?
You are correct, I work in PR. The reason you know this is because I've provided a reasonable level of transparency in my profile. Additonally, I use my real name as my user name becuase I want to be held accountable for what I say.
If I ever lied to a reporter it would end my career. I'm sorry if you felt like I was attacking you, I wasn't. I was debating the merit of your arguements, which is lost now because you continuously edit them.
Public relations has nothing to do with attacking people. The 150 people I work with would be highly offended if I told them that we lie by trade - it is simply not the case.
Do I exaggerate? Yes, but who doesn't? I'd wager the best YC applications contain a degree of hyperbole, because no one wants to get involved with something that isn't exciting.
Finally, words are the simplest way to express logic, so I'm glad we could find some common ground. If you go back and read my original comment you'll see I wasn't attacking you. I wasn't even disagreeing with you. I was simply adding my insight to your original post, which is lost now because you continue to edit or delete what you say. I'm not going to debate this any further with you, because I am starting to feel foolish being dragging into this.
So again, I am sorry if you felt attacked, that was not my intention.
Best wishes,
Clinton
PS - I've taken the liberty of copying and pasting your post below so you won't feel compelled to edit it.
0 points by voiceofreason 10 hours ago | link | parent How DARE you call me a liar? You work in a PR firm, so you use WORDS. I use LOGIC.
The point of my thread was that the author was being a jerk to Paul and should apologize. When I posted the quote where it's clear the author is insulting Paul, you got all uppity about it.
"your initial comment said that the author should apologize for comparing Paul to the musician."
At what point did I deny that I "compared Paul to the musician?" I never claimed I never said that. I simply replied to you and posted his quote you might have missed where the author said "YC is a waste of time" and also says, Paul is a bull who speaks "shit". That's why I said the author should apologize.
The author obviously meant to say Steve instead of Paul, in the intro. I didn't confuse that part of the article like you arrogantly believed. The reason I compared the two is because the user shows disdain and hate for the YC, so much he even confused his friend and Paul's names, when the two had nothing to do with one another.
You work in public relations so you're probably very good at attacking people. You're a liar and exaggerate by trade.
Do you understand it now? Or are you attacking me just because you're a PR person trying to test your training?