Comments on: Hyperlocal hero fails, finds new job http://minimediaguy.org/2008/06/05/hyperlocal-hero-fails-finds-new-job/ studying the media ecosystem Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:22:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Tom Abate http://minimediaguy.org/2008/06/05/hyperlocal-hero-fails-finds-new-job/#comment-83046 Tom Abate Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:42:33 +0000 http://minimediaguy.org/?p=1259#comment-83046 Thanks for the comments, which are well taken. It's easy to be flip when being critical and since I have no first-hand knowledge of the WP situation you are right to scold me. Tom Thanks for the comments, which are well taken. It’s easy to be flip when being critical and since I have no first-hand knowledge of the WP situation you are right to scold me. Tom

]]> By: Deryck Hodge http://minimediaguy.org/2008/06/05/hyperlocal-hero-fails-finds-new-job/#comment-82914 Deryck Hodge Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:38:19 +0000 http://minimediaguy.org/?p=1259#comment-82914 I am a programmer who worked with Rob at the Post and worked on the Loudoun site, and I'd just like to take issue with your assessment that Loudoun Extra was a "large and costly flop." First, even though the headline on the WSJ article uses the word flop, I don't think that's really the heart of the piece, and second, the article certainly doesn't describe our work as large and costly. In fact, I would say one of the failures of Loudoun Extra is that it was only one small part of a lot of other things we were asked to do. We were one part hyper-local dev team and one part try-new-things team. We were never really able to settle in on one project with our whole attention for more than 3-6 weeks at a time. The Post most know this, too, creating two teams in place of our single unit after we leave -- one for experiment development and one for hyper-local. So I have no idea how you can determine that Loudoun Extra was "large and costly." It was a small little site built at the same time that many other projects were built. The WSJ article focuses on that site alone, without any context of the other work we were asked to do. While I think the criticisms are relevant and worth considering, it's also useful to know the greater context in which that one site lives. I am a programmer who worked with Rob at the Post and worked on the Loudoun site, and I’d just like to take issue with your assessment that Loudoun Extra was a “large and costly flop.” First, even though the headline on the WSJ article uses the word flop, I don’t think that’s really the heart of the piece, and second, the article certainly doesn’t describe our work as large and costly.

In fact, I would say one of the failures of Loudoun Extra is that it was only one small part of a lot of other things we were asked to do. We were one part hyper-local dev team and one part try-new-things team. We were never really able to settle in on one project with our whole attention for more than 3-6 weeks at a time. The Post most know this, too, creating two teams in place of our single unit after we leave — one for experiment development and one for hyper-local.

So I have no idea how you can determine that Loudoun Extra was “large and costly.” It was a small little site built at the same time that many other projects were built. The WSJ article focuses on that site alone, without any context of the other work we were asked to do. While I think the criticisms are relevant and worth considering, it’s also useful to know the greater context in which that one site lives.

]]>