Wednesday, January 31, 2007

(in time) will they charge for real estate for sale ads? just wait...:)

Hi Jeff!

hmmm... are you *sure* you want to know what I think?:) Well... to make a long story short... better talk with Craig again! (you might have to hurry up if you want to use craigslist free of charge to sell NY real estate! I don't think Craig has ever said that the real estate for sale ads will remain free of charge for the long run in NY or elsewhere....)


P.S. Oh… and I’d do some research before believing all his goofy PR :) D.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Monday, January 29, 2007

will craigslist increase the fees?

I would think so... ( especially at the point where they have a solid grip on the market and not much competition)


P.S. and yes! there is precedent...

Sunday, January 28, 2007

So the users haven't asked for a reputation system, right?

Keep dreaming, Mathew... (and keep repeating what Craig/craigslist says...) Why bother doing some research on it when Craig tells you exactly what he wants you to believe?

I'm giving you just one example of such user request... (there should be plenty more where this came from, just keep searching for variations on it if you truly want to know what's going on -- the topic has been raised in the feedback forum plenty of times...) D.

Saturday, January 27, 2007

what free speech?

I think there is more to the topic... purging criticism by craigslisters, for instance, or doing away with inconvenient info seem to be flying in the face of free speech claims... D.

Friday, January 26, 2007

(non-profit times) so what were those volunteers doing?

EVEN MORE: on the NYU iBreakfast speech and Q&A


There are so many ambiguities crammed in that speech and Q&A, if you know what to listen for…

But if you believe Craig is just a nice guy and he just *happens* to be inconsistent (because he’s not all that bright or something…), I think you are missing a whole lot about craigslist!

But you are definitely not alone, if that’s any consolation…


P.S. anyways, take care! D.

MORE: even more telling... once you actually look at the "opportunities" it becomes apparent that ... pages on the site and recommendations from Craig or Nancy was ALL these "employees" were getting for compensation... (click on "BUSINESS" for instance, but it's the same for all of them; something odd: different browsers seem to bring up different pages when you click on the links I asked you to click on -- Explorer brings up the original craiglist page, the one I wanted you to see, here's the begining (but Firefox, for instance, brings up a page of the List Foundation, which ended-up being Nancy Melone's company):

"Comb the Internet for BUSINESS sites in High Technology, biotechnology, Banking, Internet, Telecommunications, Investment Banking, Brokerage, E-Commerce, Film, Entertainment, Digital Production, Transportation Medicine, Academics, as well as, schools, secondary training centers. Your searches will take you to the following metropolitan areas on the Internet: San Francisco, San Jose, LA, Orange County, San Diego, Seattle, New York, Boston, Raleigh Research Triangle, Chicago, Dallas, Fort Worth, Austin, and any other interesting sites you uncover in your searches."

they were drumming up business! (on top of helping build the site's architecture, PR and promotion)

notice they were NOT asking for volunteers... (shouldn't they have called them what they were given that the "typical compensation" was pages on the Foundation website and recommendations from Craig or Nancy?) ... but for employees! (they were telling people to send their info to Nancy to become "an employee" and asking them to "come work for the Foundation!)

I find that disingenuous in a Craig sort of way (slippery ambiguous) -- there is plenty of this stuff in that NYU iBreakfast speech... (just listen...)


Thursday, January 25, 2007

Craig's exit strategy: the real test

"my exit strategy is basically death"

Would he be still doing this at the point where a people$list would make craigslist irrelevant (which I think will happen... it's just a matter of time...) and thus Craig would lose both the glory AND the market?

I would think not... unless he is obsessive-compulsive for real (meaning he just couldn't stop! no matter what... in which case "keeping at it" has nothing to do with strategy...)


Wednesday, January 24, 2007

talk is cheap...

"Money is not the real power … The real power is the ability to invent something new that makes you happy and helps change the world"

If Craig was for real, he should have had no problem showing people (by disclosing his profits) that he is not getting rich off of craigslist while in the same time talking the grand talk…

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

truth is: staff is overwhelmed!

MORE: if you are lucky (it really depends on the topic you are interested in), here's a treasure trove of inside quotes from craigslist officials.

DLD, Monday, January 22, panel: Where are the editors?

Craig:"this is how we run our organization with very few people"
(20.09 minutes into the panel)

again ... the insiders tell a very different story: "staff is overwhelmed"! there should be a whole lot more on this for those who want to track it down... you'd have to search for different phrases (the fact that searching for "staff is overwhelmed" returns just one link makes me wonder, again, whether they are doing away with inconvenient info...) ... if you have the time and the interest just hang around in feedback/ help/ flag forums and you'll see for yourself...


P.S. a perk of listening to these (mostly boring) podcasts... once in a while something funny is said; e.g. (the presenter, 1:12 minutes into the panel, talking about the image of "life users digging the Digg stories": "looks like molecules banging around..." I'm sure he was quite unaware of what Americans might think of that statement -- the guy seems to be some sort of Western European)

even for Brits there can be plenty of unintended jokes resulting from a different way of using the same language; e.g. an American male friend once told me he couldn't keep a straight face when before retiring for the night at the end of a conference an attractive British woman asked him if he could... knock her up in the morning... (meaning knock on her door to wake her up).

and let's not forget the American country song that goes like this: "Dancing, shagging on the boulevard..." -- the Brits would think that would be a MOST unusual dance! D.

Monday, January 22, 2007

(more) dust in your eyes: Craig's finances

"I pay myself enough to buy the gadgets I want... " (15:19 minutes into the Q&A)

notice how he insinuates he's just a regular Joe making do on his salary...

Sunday, January 21, 2007

stuff keeps festering away...

Craig: ”in some cases, in some style, somebody has to say something negative no matter what…” (30:52 minutes into the Q&A)

Now, who could *that* be? *scratching head* The issues are there whether “somebody” points them out or not… (it’s your choice to address them or let them fester away…)


P.S. BTW, thanks for staying out of my way! – well, I’m not sure you followed my recommendation that closely but you’ve certainly kept quiet! (much much better than asking disingenuous questions and claiming *I* was the one “stalking” you…).

extremely modest capitalism?

Hi! (to whoever is doing this)

Just a couple of points:

“Better than any non-profit handouts” (could have stayed a non-profit and have done the same things much better by using the profits to advance the mission instead of pocketing them).

“extremely modest capitalism” (wouldn’t be so sure about that… – how do we know how much they profit if they refuse to disclose their profits? – and the long term business model that they claim not to have… appears to be *quite* capitalistic…).

Good luck with everything and take care!


Saturday, January 20, 2007

what's "adult gigs" for?

according to Jim (by way of agreeing with poster swalsh): "the talent section was overrun with porn ads. so now they have their own little section to post in, and the folks who don't want to view them no longer have to."

so the problem with all that porn was that the porn was... just in the wrong place??? (and getting in the way of *those not interested in it*... ) ... just give'em their own section???


P.S. the inside explanation for "adult gigs" is just as diffrent from the *official* line... as it is in the case of "erotic services"


Friday, January 19, 2007

falling in all the traps...

MORE: Rick's part 1 and Rick's part 2 are pretty good examples of this...

a comment on Jeff Jarvis' blog (well... the P.S. to it is relevant to this blog)

P.S. I do wish people writing about craigslist, for instance, would really take their time: do the research and do it well, consult with others and all that good stuff… (you’d think they would be much less likely to fall in all the traps…) D.

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Is Craig giving money to all the right people?

"The result is an important win for online forums like craigslist, who would be unable to provide online housing ads without this protection."

What is EFF smoking? the *ads* in case were NOT in the forums section -- they were in the *ad section*! what kind of "discourse" could possibly need protection in this area? Wouldn't EFF better serve its mission by defending legitimate free speech issues?

As to craigslist not being able to provide housing ads without having them be protected as though they were political speeches...what??? craigslist could comply with the Fair Housing Law just as the newspapers do (publishers make sure particular phrases do not appear in ads -- developing a program that identifies those phrases, no big deal, would solve the problem...)


P.S. And yes... Craig has been giving them money for a long time... D.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

what's "erotic services" for?

"The category, according to a craigslist spokeswoman, was created for legal escort services and sensual massage providers."

well... the volunteers in the feedback forum (some permanent fixtures that seem to have been there forever) have a different story: it was meant to siphon the erotic stuff (aka "garbage") in one area... -- and no, they definitely don't seem to be talking about "legal escort services and sensual massage providers"...


P.S. let me know if you have a more direct quote (Craig/Jim/Susan) from a while back: I think it should be around but haven't been able to quickly find it... let me know if you have it! thanks!

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

why switch?

MORE: Ronald Lewis ended-up posting my reply! thanks! (I guess... -- better late than never...) D.

UPDATE: never mind, Ronnie... (it think it would have been posted by now if he was going to post it; oh, well... no big deal, I just have no idea why he wouldn't post that suggestion... but he *had* to read it to decline posting it so it's all good... he *knows* what I said and who knows... he might even take such things in consideration next time around -- what a concept!) D.

Hi Ronald!

I'd take a closer look at the cold basic facts about craigslist (especially at what seems to have been the unnecessary switch from non-profit to *for* profit).


P.S. good luck with everything and take care! D.

another one of Craig's interviews goes missing...

MORE: looks like they found it! (these guys better start asking some real questions! or I'm going to have to stop listening to these podcasts ... they are getting excruciatingly boring... I have my limits...)

UPDATE: According to Trulia, the interview stopped suddenly because "some poor kid tripped on the power cord in the middle of recording..." (still, whatever was recorded is not available)

description (a search for Trulia on Technorati) :

"Craig Newmark talks to us live at the Inman Real Estate Connect conference in NYC about what’s up with Craigslist these days. Craig discusses why they started charging for rental ads in New York, how he fights spam listings and what his day-to-day is like as “Chief Customer Service Rep”.


P.S. I haven't said a word... (I swear...) D.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

dust in your eyes... (or Rick's part 2)


OK! sorry for the delay... (forgot it was MLK day, aka vacation)

So let's start with Rick's part 2 (the add-on paragraph at the end of his last reply): now, I'm not sure if this is Rick talking or Craig whispering in his ear... but I'll answer just the same...

In plenty of places (here is one), Craig says he decided to make craigslist into a "real company" in 1999. Well... what he really did was make it *for profit*! (he should at least have the decency to acknowledge what he did straight up...) It would also help if he dropped the goofy PR: A for profit is no more "real" than a non-profit -- the difference between the two is what happens if earnings exceed expenses: if it is non-profit that money goes towards advancing the mission of the company, if it is *for profit*... it goes in the pockets of the owners! So making it for profit *doesn't* advance the mission -- keeping it non-profit does!

ok... let's go back to Rick's (I'm assuming...) point:

"Whether it comes from donations or products or services, whoever establishes an org or company has an almost sacred responsibility to maintain sustainability so that it's mission can continue."

I wouldn't have put it in such dramatic terms but nothing fundamentally wrong with that (as far as I can see)... yeah, you want to be around doing whatever it was you wanted to do when you started out... doesn't by any stretch of the imagination mean that you *need* to turn for profit in order to do that! : you don't *have to* work with volunteers (part of Craig's story is that he worked with some volunteers and didn't like it -- it's hard to see how anyone could reproach them for... drumming up business and helping with everything else pretty much for free, pages on the site and recommendations from Craig or Nancy was all these people were getting...)

What he is not telling people is that he could have had *employees*! the non-profit set-up allows for normal salaries, benefits etc. for those employed and you can even *charge* in order to raise money (if you doubt this, see Jay Rosen's plans to possibly charge as part of his "non-profit all the way" NewAssigment project): again, the *difference* between a non-profit and a for profit is *what happens* with the profits!

Some non-profits are huge money-makers, like Newman's Own Charity, for instance (that makes salad dressing and a bunch of other things) -- much bigger financial success than Newman's movie career! and he wasn't a shabby actor by any means... Now, I have no doubts that it might have crossed Paul Newman's mind to... just switch to for profit! (he had the honesty *not* to do it...)

re: "Triple Bottom Line companies take a whole systems approach. Everything is connected...everything matters."

If Craig wanted a "hybrid," he should have said so upfront! Some people might have been ok with that but the pool of people willing to just pitch in and help would have very likely been much smaller and he would have had to pay for a lot more things ... but that would just have been fair! AND he should have been willing to *show* people that it *is* a hybrid -- that he&Jim are not getting rich (just like other for profit owners) -- while in the same time talking the grand talk... (which seems to be what's going on...)


Craig appears to insinuate that he *had* to turn for profit... I'll show you why that's complete bullshit! tomorrow, though... I need some sleep...Nighty night! D.

Craig's buzzwords


(to whoever is writing this blog -- wasn't apparent).

I would suggest setting aside what seem to be Craig's buzzwords and taking a good hard look at the cold basic facts: history of craigslist, their past and current claims etc. (e.g. how does the customer service look like on the ground -- are 10 people anywhere enough given the volume?, stuff like that...:)


P.S. Good luck with everything and take care!

Friday, January 12, 2007

All right! let's recap (or Rick's part 1)


All right! I'll stop reviewing this entry... (it should be good enough)

Rick's reply gives the perfect opportunity!

#1 "I agree with you that Lime removing the podcast probably means nothing."

I said nothing of the kind, I'm afraid...

here's what I said:

"I would consider that (removing the podcast from their site) as highly "negative," but I could be wrong, of course..."

in *my* book, removing the podcast that was presenting craigslist as a "good company" after I posted a comment questioning that... MEANS *something* and NOT a good thing ;) --> it means they changed their mind...

I try not to push my conclusions on other people so... that's what the "I could be wrong" phrase was intended to do (let you draw your own conclusion based on logic or whatever else you may prefer...)

#2 "The only significant criticism I could find you reference to is that Craig's List charges money. So?"

nope! my criticism wasn't that they charge money... following the link to my comment on the online New York Times would have clarified that:

"I don’t see anything wrong with for profits that are upfront about it (people know what they are getting themselves into — there is no deceit).

I’d like to see a law that prevents a company from starting as a NON-PROFIT, garnering huge support as such (donations, expertise, word of mouth etc.) and THEN turning for profit…

Also, if you *claim* to be for profit but with a “philanthropic mindset” (which means you will get rewarded if people believe you)… you should be REQUIRED to disclose your profits so people could see what you are made of… If the numbers add-up…again! I don’t see any problem…"

#3 "They asked their community for what services they should charge and how much."

according to what Craig was saying in that podcast (and in plenty of *others*) they asked the community what could they charge for *to pay the bills* (not to get rich themselves!)

-- they appear to have done this -- made in the millions for years-- while continuing to tell people to trust their moral compass, "philanthropic mind set" and what not... and REFUSING to disclose their profits...

-- the extent to which Craig &Jim have *profited* for years was only apparent when the 25% sale to ebay occurred in August of 2004 -- at the point there was finally a valuation of craigslist and a way to estimate profits; before that I doubt many suspected it -- people just trusted them... many still do -- I suspect because they don't know what's really going on, they continue to be kept in the dark as to how much Craig&Jim have been and are profiting from craigslist)

#4 "other orgs would have just charged all over the place. They didn't."

would they have STARTED as a *for profit* they could have charged whatever they wanted!... All over the place, as you say:)...

although, it appears that even in that case, charging all over the place, at this stage, would be a BAD *financial* move *for the long run* (because the list grows by NOT charging...)

they certainly appear to charge for jobs once a critical mass is reached in a particular location; yes they are still "asking"...if you can call it that -- there was no *choice* in the matter when the newer cities were added (plenty of people said *don't* charge!... -- that was just not under discussion...)

it seems to me that craigslist was trying to figure out what fee would keep most people there (as paying customers this time) and gave people a chance to complain (on *their* site instead of elsewhere -- good thinking!) if they found that helpful... (that was all it was going to accomplish)

#5 "Further there are bills to pay to maintain the operation sustainable."

there has never been a problem with paying the bills... (they could spend as much as they would like on those -- nobody in their right mind would find fault with that; in fact, they should be spending a whole lot more on customer service and improvements -- but that would cut into the *profits* the appear to be pocketing...)

#6 "If Craig & co. make money off of it so what?"

given their history and claims, that money should go towards customer service and improvements... funny thing: Craig keeps asking the rhetorical question :"how much money does a guy need, anyways?" (he would do well to answer it... keeping in my how much he profits from craigslist)

again, it would have been no problem whatsoever would they have been *upfront* about wanting to make money: that *wasn't* the deal when they started out -- for a very long time, plenty of people ended-up *donating* all sorts of resources (money, expertise, word of mouth) under the assumption that is was going to *stay* a non-profit (they had no idea Craig had commercial ambitions -- if that's what's going on -- he didn't tell them! on *the contrary*, he did everything to make them believe he didn't!) sounds like deceit to me...

and people are *still* donating resources (mostly time and good will, nowadays) believing Craig&Jim are NOT deceiving them... that they are NOT getting rich off of this... (yet, it doesn't seem to add-up...)

#7 "He is no Bob Nardelli pulling in $400M + over the last 6 years."

How do you know if they refuse to disclose their profits? I wouldn't be so sure :) ... craigslist is *very* profitable and has been for a long time... yet they continue to operate on a shoe string... bad, bad idea! (may well be the result of greed -- keeping profits as high as possible...).

#8 "Unless you can point to some skeletons in their backyard"

I did! Everything from starting as a non-profit, garnering huge support as such and THEN turning for profit (highly unethical if the point of doing that is to make money -- there should be a law against that!) to refusing to disclose their profits and continuing to get free work and word of mouth (aka. huge growth) as a consequence. And let's not forget being very thin on the very customer service they rave about...

It has deceit spelled all over it! It certainly looks like it, walks like it... etc.

#9 "I think that what they are doing is providing way more value than they are getting in return."

you *think*... (but you don't *know*...) we need to know how much they are "getting in return" and how does it play out *in the long run* (giving away "free stuff" now may be a good financial decision in the long run because you get growth as a result).

#10 " I may be wrong but I do not think Craig's List is a non-profit. I think it is a corporation. If it is a non-profit then there are filing & disclosure rules that it has to follow which would answer many of your concerns."

you are NOT wrong at all... actually that was one of my main points: that craigslist *started* non-profit and after garnering huge support as such...THEN turned for profit!

I also pointed out that that info (how much they make in *pure profit* would be out in the open would they have *stayed* non-profit -- well, in the sense that there would be NO profit, just covering normal expenses such as salaries etc. and using whatever was over for things like customer service and improvements and... we would know that for sure! (not be put in the position to merely *think* it... or hope it... or wish for it... )

That's why I was saying that, since they claim to have a "philanthropic mindset" (and continue to derive benefits from that claim), they should have voluntarily disclosed their profits so we could see what they are made of... (it should be legally required -- hopefully people wake up and a law like this is implemented to prevent deceit in the future)

OK... ( hope this helped...) Need a break from all this! Have a nice weekend everyone! :)


craigslist's undoing

Hi Howard!

I would say... on *the contrary*... their CAPITALISM will be!


P.S. I guess we'll see what happens... take care! D.

Thursday, January 11, 2007



inspiration for "people$list" was the "craig$" article in the SFWeekly

comment on Dan Gillmor's blog:

“What’s unclear is whether we’ll see a business model developed where willing buyers and sellers have equivalent information, if not power, in an aggregate sense. I don’t know.”


I think it’s quite possible! I actually suggested something like this to Craig (at a time when I wasn’t doubting his motives much): it had to do with craigslist acting as a neutral intermediary (not charging anything) between scraping sites and willing ad posters (that would give individual permission for particular ads to be posted on the scraping sites), with the aggregate money from the scraping sites going towards meeting common needs of ad posters (improvements etc., whatever they collectively agreed that money should be spent on).


P.S. I have a hunch somebody will start a “people$list” at some point (an all the way non-profit that would provide the function of craigslist and much more); I believe it would be a great set-up for the kind of things you seem to be talking about. D.

the mystery "BBC interviewer"...


he was also the guy who told Craig (in the same interview) that it *wasn't* "his own press" (unless he orchestrated it all) when he said he didn't believe his own press -- another great starting point for figuring things out

... I referred to is Owen Bennett-Jones (if you can somehow access that interview *now* (it was easily accessible when it was fresh) ... you know more than I do! (let me know how -- it should be part of BBC's "The Interview" archives)


P.S. mostly disappointing (high mushy content...) but that *allusion* (that behind Craig's philanthropic guise may lurk a cool headed business man) redeemed it for me -- this is what I was talking about in my first post (questions that are merely alluded to) D.

Monday, January 8, 2007

(more comments on) New York Times article


All right! looks like the party's over... (or was this the after party?) I had the odd feeling of being the host there... (maybe not odd, just unusual). I should probably thank the people at The New York Times -- sorry to have doubted you, guys!:)

Never underestimate serendipity! I got so much stuff down this way... The prospective of having set down and stared at the screen and described all this (seemingly talking to myself) would have been soooo boring! The info conveyed may have been the same but this was so much more fun!

Craig&Jim calling themselves "dinosaurs that don't want to be leashed"? *lol* that one took the cake! with my having gotten a craigslist date with a mouse instead of Orlando Bloom a close second (the thing is: I don't find Orlando Bloom attractive, so... it may not have made that much of a difference...)




My "deal" is not with Craig, exactly... although he *does* appear to read my comments -- it is only with him in the general context of craigslist and in the particular context of possible deceit.

I believe that if he has been/ is deceiving people in order to achieve his capitalist ends (as a poster seemed to suggest on Dan Gillmor's blog) he should be stopped...

The fact that so many people love craigslist (believing it is a decent non-deceitful company), just makes the situation sadder...


P.S. As to did I *personally* have a "bad experience" with craigslist... no! (this is not what this is about); this should also answer your intended post for my craigslist criticism blog (let me know if it doesn't...)


I'm doing well, thank you:)... Well... I'm suggesting we ignore instincts and look at the facts... (there is plenty on this in my prior comments to this article).


P.S. As to "receiving a direct reply from a big wig," that seems (to me) to be a cheap way to gain huge popularity... He may just enjoy doing that, of course, (and they are not mutually exclusive)... doesn't change *the facts* of the matter, though.... D.

Hi Diane!

Yeah... that's a good way to put it: "I don't *see* [my emphasis] where they are pigs at this point."

How do we know how greedy (or not) they are if they refuse to disclose their profits?


Are they purging criticism by craigslisters?

Although pure criticism is not exactly what they would like people to post there, feedback forum is probably the best place to look for it.

But are they arbitrarily removing (at least) some of it?

It is very rare that such criticism is quoted in the news, but here is an example:

Wrote one user: "Craig tried to act all innocent about prostitution on CL, but he created a whole category for it: Erotic Services! Duh!"

Another agreed: "You caught how C. Newmark was acting coy about the problem. I saw that, too, and it was very disappointing."

I tried to find the quotes above (searched the feedback forum) and they didn't seem to be there... also looked in the "Isle of Misfits" (where questionable threads/posts end up) ... nothing!


P.S. If I somehow missed them and you know they are there... please let me know! (I really wanted to see the whole discussion). Thanks! D.

Sunday, January 7, 2007

(more comments on) New York Times article

MORE: perhaps he is not strange at all...

Hi sf!

he may not be strange at all... (when the dust is all settled, the only strange thing may be that so many people, that otherwise appear to have decent analytical skills, bought the pitch without a question...)


P.S. as in science, *usually* the simplest explanation ends-up being the truth -- perhaps he is not strange at all...

Sorry, Val, I don't believe that to be the truth :)...

re: "The truth is what you believe the truth is… "

just how "decent" a living Craig& Jim have been making off of craigslist for years can only be know if and when they disclose their profits... and as I already said, I believe that (from the ethical stand point) they should have voluntarily done that all along

you told me (on my craigslist criticism blog) that you agree there are some moral issues, so let's set those aside then... BTW, (if you haven't noticed) I posted an answer to your comment on my blog.

re:" I’d rather have the Craigliust free of commercials and no improvements"

if the money is there (and it certainly appears to be) one doesn't have anything to do with the other...

certain "improvements" (like hiring an adequate number of customer service people, for instance) would make *their* life (not only that of the users) much easier and *safer* (as you've read on my blog, I believe they are asking for trouble in the form of special interest group law suits)...

the fact that they don't do that (hire an adequate number of customer service people) makes me question their motives ... yes, Craig would tell you he wants to stay small for reasons other then having the "savings" go straight into his pocket... (I choose to believe him when he shows us the books...)

re: "I remember Craig saying ones that he is interested in ‘free’ media or maybe he and Jim are one of the last dinosaurs that don’t want to be leashed…. You chose your truth…

yeah, Craig& Jim have been saying a lot of things... although I doubt either of them ever referred to themselves as "dinosaurs that don't want to be leashed": that was very likely the "helpful media" that instead of doing their research and asking real questions prefers to write fiction...

as to why the media is doing this... not quite sure, but... it certainly seems to sell!

no wonder plenty of people, just like yourself, feel that they are put in the position to "chose their truth," as you say...


P.S. Nice talking to you, Val, and take care! D.

on the right track

Hi Lucas!

you are on the right track... (noticing slippery ambiguities)


P.S. keep up the good job and take care!

all that fluff...

UPDATE: Craig claims I'm *stalking* him? yeah, right....


Sorry I took it literally... (I actually thought you meant it that way) No big deal... If you personally believe Craig is fantastic, I don't see anything wrong with that! I would just suggest that you don't allow that to blind you to the facts of the issue when you write about craigslist... Having said that, it seems to be a wide spread problem so... no need to be too tough on yourself!


P.S. As to *my* stalking Craig... somebody tell this guy to stop reading my comments if he feels "stalked"! (he's got much much worse problems to deal with...) D.

Hi Amy!

re: "I hit him up with some confronting and hard hitting questions...
He chose to ignore those and went for the fluff option"

now, why doesn't that surprise me...


P.S. Please let me know if you *ever* get him to answer the non-fluff stuff and take care! D.

Friday, January 5, 2007

another dewy-eyed podcast


Rick's part 1 and Rick's part 2 (the promised comment on his reply)



Well... it may have just been too much to read (your main points make me think you didn't read the stuff). So I'm not sure I helped much (doesn't look like it) but ... you are welcome just that same!


P.S. there will be a comment to your reply on my blog for the benefit of others (and yours, of course, in case you choose to read it)

P.P.S. otherwise, good luck with everything... and take care! D.

MORE: seemed to have been a problem with the comments form (we'll see if it posts)


You are welcome! and they were actually well meant (sorry if they may have come across as too critical).

You mean you checked-out No, you wouldn't find anything negative there (that's not the reason I recommended it); sorry if it wasn't clear.

I was saying that they appear to have removed from their site (after I posted a comment) their "Craig on Craigslist podcast," in which Chris (something), community manager at LIME (if I remember right) interviewed Craig in the context of craigslist being a "good company."

I would consider that (removing the podcast from their site) as highly "negative," but I could be wrong, of course...


P.S. IF you are interested in what I mean by "the facts," feel free to checkout my craigslist criticism blog!'d start with the oldest post -- tells you what it's all about...among the latter ones, a good portion are part of an ongoing comment exchange on the online New York Times that you may find of interest (here is a representative one: 31893

otherwise, take care! D.


Hi Rick!

I suggest you take a good look at the facts… maybe get together with the people at LIME ( and figure out just how “well” craigslist is really doing and whether or not it is a “good company” (I’d ask for their “Craig on Craigslist” podcast that appears to no longer be available ( – you can find what was my comment to it on my craigslist criticism blog:

Good luck with everything and take care!


Thursday, January 4, 2007

Craig's note takers...


ok... looks like it's been over 24 hours and it's not posted; well... they didn't really need to post it (it's good enough that they got the message...hopefully...) D.

funky site... not sure what's up with the odd comment submission form -- it *looked* like I submitted it, they are saying it takes up to 24 hours to post, hasn't been that long but... here it is:

Michael, you sound like a nice guy but...good God! why aren't you asking this guy some real questions? this is supposed to be an interview, right? How come it reads like you are taking notes of what Craig is telling you?

Wednesday, January 3, 2007

(more comments on) New York Times article


sorry about the delay (was away for the day)

Yeah, Valentin, that's the spiel (you've summed it up pretty well) -- I'm just not sure that's the truth... Doesn't seem to add-up...

Bee: Why I'm so bent on the truth... for one thing, if it came out that they have been making in the millions for years as it appears to be (money that went straight into Craig and Jim's pockets instead of paying for things like customer service and improvements, which would have happened would craigslist have *stayed* non-profit) something tells me that the vast majority of those... souls... (toiling away in the feedback forum)... would be kicking themselves! and would be right to do so...


Those are positive externalities, Eric (not the meat of the issue) -- look at craigslist' history & their claims, also look at the impact of those unverifiable (as long as they refuse to disclose their profits) claims on the way people continue to perceive craigslist (and the resultant growth rates) and let's not forget the poor souls toiling away in the feedback forum and such trying to help out... -- at a minimum, *they* are owed the truth! D.

Monday, January 1, 2007

Nancy Melone...

(listed as CEO on the craigslist site up to April 1999) one interesting piece of the puzzle!

just listen... it’s September 1999

"Metrovox is the creator of the new ListFoundation site, which Melone says is also trying to build grassroots success by letting visitors post classified-like advertisements from major cities around the country. The difference is that by October, Metrovox will charge companies from $25 to $40 to post job openings for a month, dedicating part of the profits to charity."

Well... doesn't that sound a lot more "philanthropic" than craigslist ended-up being? At the time, the press presented her as "the bad guy" yet craigslist ended-up being a lot more for profit than Nancy ever intended! -- isn't it odd that the press doesn't seem to mind that?


P.S. Nancy didn't seem to understand that you CAN’T charge for a good long while (if you want to have significant growth); Craig never had any trouble grasping that (he pretty much spells it out in a couple of the interviews) --*could* be because he planned it all along

2007 bonus: craigslist's Achilles' heel

... or why continuing to operate on a shoestring while a large number of illegal ads are on the site is such a bad idea:

-- like any other business on the web, craigslist is legally required to remove illegal postings from their site (once they are brought to their attention)

-- so nothing would stop interest groups (like the fair housing one, for instance) from gathering a huge number of illegal postings, sending the info in to the severely understaffed "craigslist customer service team" (and keeping good records of it) and waiting whatever the reasonable time for removal would be... THEN filing a lawsuit! (on the basis that craigslist didn't remove the illegal postings within a reasonable time of being made aware of them)