> the companies in question evidently don't value information, and have instead relied on personal hubris
Nothing in the post indicated hubris to me. "I have used this service before and can give you an estimation of how well it fits our usecase" is probably the best information about a service you can get. The alternative is to spend time and money to discover that yourself.
Claiming that you are personally responsible for Jira and Trello's marketing cut-through is sheer hubris.
And furthermore:
> The alternative is to spend time and money to discover that yourself
That's not an "alternative", that is simply professional consulting behaviour. Making the recommendation whilst declining to invest in the quality of that recommendation is hubris. And I'll double down by adding that "influencers" demanding freebies is downright obnoxious hubris. In the last few years, some segment of the tech community has normalized this behaviour as somehow acceptable and rational, but in practice it's as toxic as the article suggests.
I've also got a number of solutions that just solve the problem at reasonable price. My recommendation in those categories will be "X can do it; have you got specific requirements that X doesn't match? if not, I can implement it with X and we can review that in months/years".
Somewhat tautological perhaps, but also, thereby, not a compelling reason to offer a free plan, nor to be proud of being glib.
In addition highlighting that any comparison between an influencer and a consultant depends on false equivalence, which is why I don't consider them part of a product ecosystem (esp. when compared with ISVs, VARs and MSPs), or a substitute for thoughtful, professional advisors.
You’re totally correct in your assertions and the understanding of the intent and meaning of my post.