Dave is an investor in Mint, a company that was recently acquired by Intuit, along with being a generally well respected guy in the tech universe.
Dave is apparently mad because another prominent blogger, Jason Fried, CEO of 37Signals, wrote that he suspected, based purely on his gut, that the Mint investors probably forced the CEO and founder of Mint, Aaron Patzer, to sell early in an unethical greed induced desire to cash out.
Jason's belief was that Mint had an opportunity to create a category killing product, and that selling out to Intuit was effectively like selling out to the dark side.
This all happened a couple of weeks ago, and it appears that Jason was wrong at least about whether the investors forced him to sell. The sale price was 170 million, and so it is not hard to imagine that Aaron actually thought it was a good idea. He says that he was not forced and that he was very happy about the deal.
But none of that is the point of this post.
The point is that Dave's post is an expletive filled over-the-top rant that just seems, well, mean spirited. Here are some of the high points.
[disclosure: the views expressed below are my own, and do not in any way represent the official position or perspective of either Mint.com or Founders Fund... so please fuck off.]
I presume the fuck off part above is aimed at people like me who he knew would comment on this post.
Memo to Jason Fried: Sorry, You're Fucking Wrong
Fucking Wrong, and Irresponsible Conjecture & Hyperbole
Completely Fucking Wrong, and in fact Exactly the Opposite trend is going on, and finally
Perhaps you might want to contact one of these investors -- who, like me, are all publicly listed in Mint's entry on Crunchbase -- and ASK one of them, before you blow such a wild assertion out of your ass?
if you're simply too damn lazy to do some basic research, maybe you could just ask any experienced entrepreneur or venture investor why in the hell would it make any fucking sense for Series B investor Benchmark to encourage a sale that's likely only 4-5x its investment
In short, your logic here is not only faulty, it's piss-poor and reveals your absolute ignorance of what goes on in the venture world.
Dave then caps it off with:
And Jason: now that i've ripped you a new one, i'd like to apologize for all the harsh commentary and say that altho i disagree with you on this issue, i still think you're an amazing entrepreneur, and i still use your products. Happy to buy you a beer and shoot the shit anytime.
Then, after being taken to task by a commenter he responds, in part by saying:
i don't know if you're much older than my 43 years, but started programming ~30 years ago, have worked in Silicon Valley for over 20, founded & sold my own business in the 90's, worked at PayPal in the early days before IPO, ran marketing for a few years at Simply Hired, and -- as noted above -- was an investor in Mint.com, as well as over 50 companies in the past 5 years.
This piece serves as a really great example of what prominent people in our or any community ought not be doing. In fact, it is a really great example of what's wrong with discourse in the modern high speed communications world. This is particularly true in the political sphere, but also broadly true in the online world. I fully realize that this kind of talk is part of human nature, and that nothing I say is going to change it. Still, it is shocking when you read someone as prominent as Dave McClure, writing a blog post like this. Whatever offense he believes Jason Fried committed, his piece makes Jason's post seem mild and uncontroversial.
I dunno. Call me silly. But can't we disagree without calling each other names, and using "fuck" every other sentence, and trying to diminish people's arguments by foisting your resume on them?
By the way, I suspect Dave is a totally decent person who doesn't behave this way in person, and who I'd happily buy a beer for and shoot the shit any time.