zachware

Have they checked website optimizer? Google isn't a call me and let's talk about it company. It has very efficient and streamlined tools to help people figure out what is wrong.

There's a good chance there is an indexing problem that could easily be rectified if they just check webmaster tools.

(PS. Ditto on the misleading URL)

These days the operative buzzwords are open and transparent. I don't advocate both of those concepts blindly but I do ask, what is the potential downside of offering this level of data to the public?

If you keep everything private then you have something to hide, better yet you have something to manipulate. Perhaps you want to go public or attract investors with your projections not your reality.

In appropriate cases this type of sharing can bring your users into your business in ways no other tactic can. Devout users want to see you succeed and this gives them that barometer.

All in all, I applaud them (assuming making it public was intentional.) Not only does it help me benchmark my business but it helps me connect with Tweetminer in a way I otherwise wouldn't.

This wasn't an interview, it was a test. I had a similar experience with a startup. I was interviewing for a Marketing Communications Manager position. Essentially PR.

One of the unofficial interviewers (at 24 year old MIT engineer working as an email marketer) challenged me with the question "How many barbers are in San Francisco?" We proceeded to map it out the analytical process on the whiteboard. He wanted to see formulas to understand how I would arrive at the answer.

It was a stupid, impossible question. In a similar way to this girl's experience, he jabbed repeatedly critiquing my logic.

He wrote me later to explain that he posed the same question to his girlfriend, an MIT engineer herself, and she couldn't come up with an answer. Neither could he.

They offered me the job and I declined solely based on this guy and his misguided, silly behavior. I would have hated to work with him.

When a company misguidedly challenges potential employees in this way it hurts the quality of its hires. Sure, Google can afford to be picky but does it really need an engineer in a Product Marketing role? Perhaps for dev-facing apps but such an interview process is overall misguided and immature.

But then what's the point of the change of address tool in Google Webmaster Tools?

Screenshot: http://bit.ly/4xZpA8

Agreed. User base in a internet facing app means something when users visit the site to interact. Twitter is such an open platform for communication (like email, sms, and hell, even the web) that monetizing it as a service seems impossible.

I would venture to guess that based on revenue Tweetie is more valuable that Twitter itself. Myspace, Youtube, Facebook, they all have pageviews.

Twitter was founded as an SMS service and won't ever be able to fully monetize the platform unless they close the API (which they won't).

Valid point and it crossed my mind too, however Google's systems are aware of domain shifts (I assume the Dropbox folks filed a domain change) and it should know about its 'transferred' positive rap.

If the block is solely based on malware distribution then Facebook would have suffered the same fait ages ago.

Amisdst all the data Google stores it should be clear that Dropbox isn't a random site freely dropping malware around the web.

If it can't figure it out then a good old fashioned human should.

The article is well thought out and presents a good viewpoint. I think it's one-sided and, um, short-sighted.

I see the RFP process from the viewpoint of a buyer and a provider. From the buyer's standpoint, when we start a project we simply don't know what firms are capable of doing what we want done. The RFP gives us a level playing field to compare costs, capabilities, and experience.

Without an RFP, particularly for complex projects, you can spend months scoping out capbilities, refining your needs (both of which you should be doing AFTER you form a relationship.)

Which takes longer for a firm? Researching an RFP and presenting a document for a potential client's review or spending eight months going back and forth trying to figure out what to build. Of course, the latter. The difference is that providers get paid for those eight months (a plus for them) while buyers get nowhere.

zgware@gmail.com. Excited to check it out.