November 7th, 2007 at 4:16 am
In your essay, your points are selective and biased itself.
There is nothing wrong in implementing $1 or $100. Ultimately policies are implemented themself and people just obey under the TOS right?
Problem, they failed to give advance notice. How much advance should be given, has already been raised, discussed and debated over many blogs, forums and essays so lets not go into detail on that, but we can safely describe it as insufficient in this case(well, according to the consensus)
Second, if you gone to certain websites, you would had realised, the owners of Nuffnang actually gone onto blogs of their publishers to reply, debate, and question, just short of begging bloggers to sympathize with their circumstances with reasons such as 20cent envelop, mobile bills not paid, and in one sentence it described “Labour is more or less subsidised and free in this instance.” (http://www.putraworks.com/2007/10/06/nuffnangs-shocking-news/)
How can labour is free? Labour in any sense is part of your overhead which of course is part and parcel of any business. Therefore in any business, your labour is not free, because you are in it for profit making and any profit that you make, you pocket. So you are theoritically trading your labour for money which is the profit. Their public debating are simply superfluous. Their action is uncalled for, because of the fact, bloggers do not depend on them to blog. They depend on the bloggers to publish their advertisements.
The blog was of course not started because of $1. I would believe you are smarter than that to think that $1 trigger off unsatisfaction comments in blogs to the point of a website and forum being setup.
The downfall of the company would not be decided by this 1 buck issue or the website or any forum. The fate of the company is in the hand of Timothy and Ming and if they make a mistake in something again and get publicized again in Techcrunch, it is not because they are victimising them. When you have something for others to write, they will write. All these are part and parcel of being in the limelight eventhough its not much to your liking.
It is no longer about the $1. Given another company, another man, another time, another day, a $1 issue might not even go to the news. It went to the news because the person who was chosen(or maybe volunteered) to handle the public was not up to the mark and he left offending bloggers and readers with his remarks all over the web and illogical reasoning. That triggers everything off. And suddenly, they became the enemy of the public eye, but thats a fair game. You play well, you win, you play badly, you get bricks thrown at you.
If at this point, the Nuffnang owners still have not understood what had gone wrong, then my prediction is that they would close shop before mid of next year.
Discuss this post in the Asia's First Nuffnang Discussion Forum
If you find this site helpful, please leave your footprint on this site using the shoutbox on the right.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007