Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Who is "we"? Unless you have a large financial stake in the company you aren't part of the discussion at all.


We live in a society. If you want to build a company in international waters cut off from the rest of the world, by all means. I hear there was a nice anti-regulation company that has a boat they don't need anymore, so maybe you could take over the lease. There's a reason why we decided banks have to have be monitored and if they're insolvent they can be taken over, or why you have to IPO and provide a bunch of information to investors if you want to sell stock in your company. There's "private" transactions that create enough systemic risk so that we have to regulate them.


As SO contributors, _we_ have a say with regard to our future consideration of SO as a destination of our contributions.

Since SO is just a platform, it can't survive without _our_ content.

People have much more power than they think.


That only works if all SO contributors band together and make decisions as a collective bloc. At the moment you are only speaking for yourself. Most others who add value to the platform are going to keep doing so regardless.


If only there was something to enable lots of people to coordinate easily ... like ... a big computer network?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: