>There is a great deal of Philip worship on ./ >and I can understand this: I used to think like
>you. However I have met the guy and have
>used the ACS extensively and worked with
>many people who know Philip better than
>myself, and it is painfully apparent that
>although he has a great web presence and
>writes convincingly, he's nothing more than a >self important, arrogant prick...

Why "./" rather than "/."? Is this some RPN convention of which I am unaware?

I am having some problems with the "Phil Greenspun is an egotistical egomaniac-loser" line of argument: namely, what does that make the VCs who invested in his company?

When you invest in a company with a "mercurial" founder--and when your company's public reputation and mindshare is based on that mercurial founder's successful self-promotion and his resultant cult--then management job #1 is to keep said mercurial founder happy.

For "professional" managers to so singularly fail at this task--invalidating your company chairman's key card, for God's sake!--would seem to me solid evidence that Greylock doesn't know what it is doing, and is putting people who cannot handle the job into CEO slots...