Hacker News Reader

Comment by jgg | Hacker News Reader

I personally use the two week rule. If someone says they'll get back to me in a few days I give them a couple weeks before I e-mail a reminder.

Oh, right. I forgot that in the business world, words suddenly don't have any fucking meaning whatsoever. You can bet your ass that if a corporation wanted something from you (i.e., payment) in a few days, they wouldn't leisurely wait a few weeks before e-mailing you.

There seems to be this unspoken rule in the Apple world that if you happen to get an e-mail from Steve Jobs, even if he threatens to dig up your dead mother and defile her corpse, you'd better drop down on your knees and thank him for even speaking to you.

Fuck that.

View on HN

You seem to be getting confused about the relationship here.

Getting a payment from someone is very different to trying to get something for free from a company, or trying to get acquired.

I don't understand why everybody is emailing Steve Jobs all of a sudden, and I certainly wouldn't just start sending email to CEOs of companies.

You seem to be getting confused about the relationship here.

No, I'm not.

Getting a payment from someone is very different to trying to get something for free from a company, or trying to get acquired.

You promise the company payment. The guy in the e-mail was promised continued discussion at a specific point in time. The point I'm making is that if you shortchange a company, they have more power to punish you than if they shortchange you. Thus, I don't understand this casual attitude with companies, where if you don't get a response you just "give up".

I don't understand why everybody is emailing Steve Jobs all of a sudden, and I certainly wouldn't just start sending email to CEOs of companies.

What's wrong with sending an e-mail to a CEO? I genuinely don't understand this. We saw the same thing with that prick from AT&T. Why is it so taboo to jerk the chain of the person in charge? Is their time just so valuable that they shouldn't even have to bother with the lowly proles?

Emailing the CEO because some engineer isn't responding promptly enough to your emails isn't a good way to get him on your side. From your perspective, he promised you something and you are trying to get him to deliver. From his perspective, you've just alerted the CEO of the company (multiple times) that maybe he's not being productive enough.

In general, it's not a good way to get this guy to give you a green light on getting hired/acquired.

That's so true! In fact I can sort of see the corporate pattern:

1. Steve -> Engineer: Whats with the delay?

At this point, almost nothing the engineer could say shows him in a good light - "sick" doesn't cut it at the power difference here. You only talk to the CEO once in a decade, and his experience of you is "doesn't deliver"?

2. Engineer -> Steve: I evaluated it. It sucks. I haven't written back yet as it's not a high priority.

3. Email from Steve -> Unfortunate dude: No interest.

Alternately:

1. Steve -> Manager: This guy e-mailed me again, does this need to be dealt with?

2. Manager -> Steve: It's a good algorithm, but the guy's been demanding and impatient, and with everyone prepping iOS/iPhone 4 for WWDC, Engineer just hasn't had time to look into it.

3. Steve -> Dude: No interest.

Specifically, I highly doubt that Steve Jobs would speak directly with an engineer about a potential acquisition of a potentially useful algorithm. I doubt it was ever really on his radar at all after the first 30 seconds where he read it and forwarded it off. That's the entire reason managers exist.

Upmodding you to counter the mindless fanboy downmods. It's a bit ridiculous that any negative opinion about The Idol gets downmodded.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com