Indiegogo Code for the Web -- Draft comments

On 5/18/13 11:13 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
> Let me know if we've addressed all of your
> concerns, or if there are still things on the page that should be
> clarified further in order to convey that this is a legitimate project.
>
> -- manu

Manu,
Tim's concerns (most of which I agree with) inspired me to try to look 
at the Indiegogo page more from an outsider's point of view. You've 
addressed Tim's concerns in your re-edit, but I still feel there are 
several things that might be improved, and that they might bother 
someone directed to the page who doesn't know you or the background of 
the web payments group.

So, I too apologize if these seem harsh, but what you're doing seems 
worthwhile to me and my opinion is it's in danger of being derailed by 
the following:

1. Why are there only three mentors listed at the very bottom, but 8 
listed in the "Who are mentors?" section? Apparently the 'team' at 
Indiegogo is different from the actual mentors? How so? I don't like 
this confusion.

2. Since your face, Manu, is the only one at the top and bottom 
(aside: couldn't the other mentors on the 'team' have pictures too?), 
forgive me if I say that it seems impolite for you to list yourself 
first on the list of 8 mentors. The classical way to give such a list 
would be alphabetical. Or you could list yourself last, which I think 
would be OK too.

3. "World class students", "best students",  "top students", "really 
exceptional students", "amazing students" are terms you use, but the 
only specific information you give about how we know that they are 
these things is that there were 40 applications and 8 were chosen (4 
for sure, 4 hopeful). Is there anything else you can say? What's to 
prevent someone from thinking that 40 people who were enthusiastic but 
not very good put in applications, and you swallowed hard and took the 
best 8?  (I don't believe this, but that's possible from reading the 
page -- although you do say "many of them" came with glowing 
recommendations. Not all of them? -- in other words, what guided your 
choices?)

4. I think the "brightest minds in the world" reference to mentors in 
the fourth paragraph is too much. You've already described them as 
"some of the brightest minds that build the technology for the Web" in 
the first paragraph. And someone who's thinking of giving money is 
likely to read this page very carefully, and I think it will seem 
likely to them that you, Manu, wrote this page, and since you're 
listed as a mentor (at this point, the first one), you're apparently 
describing yourself as one of the "brightest minds in the world". That 
may be true, but you're not supposed to say it.  :-) You need to get 
someone else to say it. And sign their name. :-)  Or, cut it and just 
leave the first reference in, which is probably the easier of the two 
to engineer at this point.

5. I  think there's too much vague exaggeration; in addition to the 
repeated words about the students, I think "fantastic" publishing 
tools, "really awesome" technology, the repetition of "cutting edge", 
and "This isn't just any old paid internship" could all be deleted. 
I'd like to refer you to the classic "The Elements of Style" by Strunk 
and White: they teach that in most cases nonspecific emphasizers 
reduce the power of a noun rather than adding to it; avoid them 
whenever possible. I think that applies here.


Steven

Received on Monday, 20 May 2013 00:19:15 UTC