Monday, February 26, 2007

(Guardian) why bother researching the issue?... let *Craig* tell the story!

to its credit, Wikipedia regards Craig's blog as biased towards Craig and his company ("In this (wikipedia) article, your blog is listed as an official site, meaning that it should be treated as biased toward the article subject"; under "article errors") -- the Guardian doesn't seem to care... it links directly to Craig's blog instead of doing their own research on the issue:"[Craig was] trying to edit his Wikipedia entry" and so...? what happened? D.

Sunday, February 25, 2007

who are they kidding? (craigslist just *happened* to grow.. they never pursued it!)

EVEN MORE: keep in mind that they were doing this in 1998! when craigslist was in San Francisco ONLY (seeking out job posting prospects etc. in plenty of other metro areas shows definite intent and action towards "accelerating growth" as far as I can see...) D.

MORE: as usual, I'm just picking ONE issue but read the whole thing if you have the time and interest (there is plenty that should give you reason to do some research and see for yourself) D.

Jim: "we've never done anything to accelerate the growth in terms of advertising or anything like that."

well... see for yourself: it certainly looks like drumming up business to me! (much more agressive than plain old advertizing...)


Friday, February 16, 2007

please keep an eye on this for me! (Jimmy gets into the mix...)



yep! I thought that might happen...

the history pages for "craigslist" and "Craig Newmark" are the thing to watch...(those give you an up to date list of changes made to those articles by anybody)... and I hope you do! this should be pretty interesting! again, getting craigslist criticism that is TRUE (and verifiably so) off Wikipedia (especially if it is done by Jimmy himself) is the major concern here...

Is Jimmy "helping out" Craig? (they are said to be friends...) If so, shouldn't Jimmy have recused himself? I think so...

See you in a week or so!


P.S. I'll be gone house hunting... D.

Thursday, February 15, 2007

what's Craig *really* up to?

Well... I don't think we have enough info at this point to know what's Craig *really* up to... For one thing, we NEED to know how much he is and has been *profiting* from craigslist... (as the owner of a sizable chunk of it) and how does it all play out in the long run (what may *look* like not maximizing income at this time may well be an illusion that will be dispelled in time since it appears that the long term picture is very different).

As to "giving extensively to charity," again... we NEED to know how much he *profits* and has been profiting from craigslist... and how much he gives (I'm not aware of substantial donations, given his estimated *profits* -- I'm NOT talking *salary*, that's just a red herring...).


P.S. I might have been impressed with Craig if he would have been for real, if he would have either kept craigslist a non-profit (and used the profits to pay for things like customer service and improvements, instead of pocketing them while in the same time talking the grand talk... which seems to be what's going on) or at least voluntarily disclosed his profits so people could see what he's made of... The fact that he doesn't do that makes me think he's full of hot air... (probably much more so than Larry Ellison and pretty much all those who were upfront about wanting to make money).

P.P.S. Oh... and he no longer drives a Saturn (not that it matters much...) D.

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

craigslist mythology

MORE: I have a feeling Al is a lost cause... -- it's not like I hadn't already given him a pretty good hint (he continues to be clueless... unless he's intentionally misleading) D.

Hi Al!

re: "PayScale, Inc. is a market leader in global online compensation data"

oh boy... that's bad news :) ... (that even the leader gives such inaccurate info -- it helps perpetuate the unbelievably long-lived craigslist mythology)


P.S. most of your facts are either not up to date or purposefully misleading... (e.g. craiglist is NOT a nonprofit, although they make it difficult for plenty of people to realize that, and Craig is NOT a CEO...) D.

Monday, February 12, 2007

(inadequate customer service) just how frustrated do users get?

just listen to this poor 52 year old woman...: "All I'm trying to do is share some really nice cross stitch charts that are not available anywhere else... (...) ... Just when I think I am following the advice from someone here, to the letter, I get told yet again that I am violating the rules and regulations on Craig's List ... (...) ... now it appears as if they are allowed but then again, not alowed"

Sunday, February 11, 2007

"What's the right way to edit the page about my company and my own bio?"

MORE: he's NOT pushing? (Cnewmark 17:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC) under "article errors") what is he doing then...? what's the point of propping up Lumarine? notice that his agreement with him -- that his simply asserting the stuff should be enough -- is the opposite to what he said on his blog: "for very good reasons, I just can't assert the facts. That makes sense, in light of increasing fact checking, which is mighty important.") what happened with all those very good reasons? sounds like he was bullshitting again... D.

UPDATE: well, that doesn't work as well as I expected... (Craig posted to the Wikipedia talkpage for "Craig Newmark" without signing the post, meaning it does NOT show on his contributions page... just keep an eye on Wikipedia talkpages for "craigslist" and "Craig Newmark" if you'd like to follow this... that should keep you abreast of what's going on...)

there is NO right way to edit Wikipedia pages on oneself or one's company... (especially when you are Craig Newmark and are very likely to get preferential treatment even if all you do is "suggest" things...)

notice what was the actual effect of his "suggestions"-- it got even mild valid criticism (that should have been easily proven to be true and verifiably so) off the page:

"An issue faced by many users is that the company allows other users (volunteers) to police the site for them" ( searching feedback, flag and help would have shown that's true...)

"Many believe that the company must do more to police such actions through more intense screening of volunteers or monitoring of their behavior." (again, searching feedback, flag and help would have shown that's true...)

these were present prior (to editor EncMstr' removing "unsupported material contested by user:Cnewmark; minor cleanup of voice, grammar, cites, wikidates") and are absent thereafter ...

EncMstr: "In your case [meaning Craig's case], I'd be happy to incorporate any changes for which I can find a reliable published source, or remove material for which I can't find something you point out is in error."(under "proper etiquette")

well... what he really did was remove info that was NOT in error (and could have easily found that out through basic research) without even stating what he removed... (which makes it difficult to notice what took place)


P.S. if you are interested in when and how this all started and unfolds, check-out Craig’s Wikepedia contributions page D.

Saturday, February 10, 2007

routing around the press

re:"The CEO today who doesn’t route around the traditional press on some issues is making a big mistake."


I was going to let this one go... but I figure I might just as well tell you what I think: they are certainly free to *try* to do it... (route around the press) but they *shouldn’t* be able to do it! I think it’s very sad to see how media ends-up presenting what is in essence company PR as "news" without doing even basic research to check for truthfulness of statements and such…


P.S. I'm quite aware of this in the context of craigslist, but I suspect lazy journalism can be found pretty much anywhere... D.

Friday, February 9, 2007

changes to Wikipedia page on"craigslist"

Craig: "If it's expeditious, I can get help from Jimmy"(under "article errors") ... so Wikipedia is a great thing when it comes to others... (Craig has been prasing it for a very long time) but when it comes to himself and craigslist... it's just not expeditious enough!

Jimmy should just step in and do the changes he wants done! if he says so... it MUST be so! (like when he said users haven't asked for a reputation system, for instance... what's not clear about that?) -- he is the unquestionable authority on craigslist, isn't he? well... it works with the vast majority of media! why should Wikipedia be any different? refering to this, ostensibly as a joke, Craig was complaining that (for Wikipedia) he is not authoritative enough on himself...(this morning at the WeMedia conference)


P.S. BTW, to my pleasant surprise, my blog is part of the Wikipedia page on “Craig Newmark”! (under "external links") by way of my comment to his NYU speech – I hope it stays that way… I do think my blog gives good information people should be aware of … (although I think it's more relevant to “craigslist” than to “Craig Newmark”… oh well… I’m not that picky… thanks to… let’s see... who was it? there! ; also thanks to for adding the "craig$" article, which was my inspiration for people$list) D.

Thursday, February 8, 2007

Reuters: "will there be a craigslist of news?"

... "Alan, wisely - threw the question to Craig Newmark who was in the audience. Long silence, and then craig said - 'not from us.' That was all he's say - turning the conversation to the 'ducks on the lawn.' Funny."

I wouldn't be so quick to laugh... makes me wonder whether Craig's got something up his sleeve again... (I wouldn't be surprised, for instance, if at some point he would lend craigslist's infrastructure to some other entity for new gathering purposes... -- if you are interested in this line of thinking just search for his previous statements on the issue, it seems to me that he has at least considered the option in the past, in the context of Daylife if I'm not mistaken...) D.

Wednesday, February 7, 2007

and what's ... *craigslist's* profit margin?

Craig: "Start viewing themselves more as a community service and forget about 20-percent profit margins. And start speaking truth to power."

Craig is a fine one to talk! craigslist's profit margin appears to be astronomic and getting more so by the day... as to "speaking truth"... it's high time Craig told people the truth about craigslist! (such as how much he profits from craigslist)


P.S. how can these people listen to him without cracking-up?

Tuesday, February 6, 2007

Craig must be hypnotizing people!

MORE: notice how the media's "forgetting to mention" what really took place acts as very effective craigslist PR (aka "Craig's own press")

re: "[craigslist] has never paid to advertise itself"

how is it possible that otherwise respectable publications such as Christian Science Monitor don't do their research when they write about craigslist?


P.S. right! they figured they could just "pay" their "employees" in pages and recommendations and everybody would forget about it... D.

Monday, February 5, 2007

perhaps it's just spin?


Well... let's assume he actually meant it... so the newspapers are fat cats that need to go on a diet -- we are just doing them a favor by stealing their food! (or something like that...:). Sounds pretty unfounded to me... that what the newspapers need at a time when they face serious problems (which need plenty of money to be fixed) is... less money!


P.S. I'd have to track it down but I remember that at some point in the past Craig said that newspapers may need financial support from the government (I agree...); if that's the case it's hard to see how Jim's statements could be anything *but* silly PR... D.

Hi Jean Ives!

re: "Perhaps he is looking at a broader conception of “newspaper journalism” as a duty and ideal, and comparing it to the corporate face forced upon some big newspaper chains today?" (Jim: "Anything that's taking money from newspaper chains in the long run may very well be the most healthy thing that can happen, as far as newspaper journalism is concerned")

perhaps you are reading too much into it.... perhaps it's just spin? (sound like easy PR to me: craigslist is NOT hurting newspaper journalism -- in *fact*, we are helping them out!)


P.S. notice that he is not talking FACTS *at all*, just speculation... D.

Saturday, February 3, 2007

"This guy is rich"

EVEN MORE re: "the world needs more free things to keep spinning!"

Ha, ha... this guy will be in for a big surprise! (when his local market matures and Craig will charge as much as he can get away with -- it's just not ripe for the picking right now...) D.

MORE: again... notice how Craig "drops in" to do damage control (statements like "this guy is rich" or "[all that prostitution on craigslist] should make Craig Newmark feel so proud" damage his image... but he can't afford to address the issues straight on (he would lose!)... so what does he do? he just insinuates that's not the case ("am I rich?" -- as though he doesn't own a big chunk of craigslist and has profited from it for years; "giving someone a break who really needs it" -- as thought the huge number of women who end up becoming craigslist prostitutes really need the kind of "break" he is providing) and takes off before people realize what he's done... it's a cheap trick and it can't work forever... (people are going to figure him out, eventually...) D.

UPDATE: Good God! looks like I found another Chris Abraham... (a word from Craig -- *any* word at all -- turns them into groupies! and this one doesn't even have the I-just-want-to-sell-my-wares excuse; oh, well... they'll wake up eventually, unless they are brain washed beyond repair...)

re: "As for rich or not, I don’t know, and it’s none of our business :) - I guess we threw the phrase around without too much thought…"


P.S. Oh and... of course he didn't post my reply... (pussy...)

Hi! (to whoever wrote this -- who was it, BTW? hard to tell...)

re: "This guy is rich"

yep! I think so too! (as a result of profiting from craigslist for years...) yet he continues to insinuate he's just a regular Joe...


P.S. people are going to wake up eventually, see right through his goofy PR and see him for what he really is... D.

Friday, February 2, 2007

What's with the "" bullshit?

Re: What is really

Hi Stephen,

Good question! If they want to keep calling themselves "" – if you try to access it automatically redirects you to – they should voluntarily disclose their profits!


P.S. are they worthy of the “org” designation or are they just talking the grand talk and… quietly pocketing the money? D.