Monday, October 6, 2008

a breath of fresh air: William Reardon

EVEN MORE: (10th comment) I don't know if it is really disingenuity, William -- most of the articles on craigslist/Craig Newmark are just plain fiction... (and a good part of these writers appear to honestly believe the fairy tale). D.

MORE: (6th comment) he would probably say that it just *so happened*... so far:)... and it may not be untrue -- I suspect he is quite capable of switching "political sympathies" if the "price" is right: say, all in a sudden republicans favored such things as "net neutrality" (which would mean serious money for craigslist and, of course, for him, as the owner of a big chunk of it) D

Hi, William! (4th comment; #comment-16557)

I don't know if you noticed but he sort of answered this on twitter:

"I contribute to the best people,regardless of affiliation"


P.S. I don't know if you are aware (I suspect not) but he appears to have contributed to NAMBLA ( -- I wish somebody would really look into this...

P.P.S glad I came across somebody else who is not talking his word as gospel -- keep it up!:) D.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Craig's own press: the never ending stream of naive reporters...

EVEN MORE: comic relief: (2nd comment; #comment-133645293) "*definitely*,much too "kind"... suppose she would have pointed out what would "net neutrality" mean for you/craigslist *financially* :)... (just to put things in perspective for the readers like competent reporters do...) D.

MORE: sure enough... and he does a lot more than just hope -- he uses his tech-advisor-to-the Obama-campaign position to spin things in his favor (how is it possible to just print what he says without mentioning that Craig/craigslist would financially benefit from this?) and then he gets away with having the press print his diatribe on corrupt lobbyists (6th paragraph) when he appears to do the same thing himself: claims grass root support without disclosing that he/craigslist has a big financial interest in the issue... D.

Kim Heart: (2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence) "[Craig] admits he has 'nothing to gain' from helping get Obama elected." --> well... there is a whole story behind that... Craig's choice of candidates appears to have been heavily influenced by the fact that Obama was the one candidate who said he was going to be for "network neutrality," which would greatly favor Craig/craigslist...financially... now, when it came down to voting, Obama didn't carry through... so it may be that it is true that Craig is not going to get anything out of it... but he must at least hope he can turn it around... D.