4 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 19.5 ms ] thread
I thought naming it "floown" was the mistake. Apparently the mistake was actually not firing everyone involved and starting over.

"our platform that helps organizations always know who's available to work."

What does that even mean? Is it a calendar? Ugh this .com stuff drives me up the wall...

Agreed. The other blog posts are equally devoid of substance. This one is a winner!
There's also this beauty:

>Still, we pulled through and re-shifted our focus to our original vision: to build an on-demand versatile team that truly believes in a future of work where people have multiple clients or employers.

That one has so many buzz words I'm not even sure what it was they were trying to say. Luckily they clarify it in the next sentence:

>A team that believes in the platform we're trying to build, and more importantly, believes in the roadmap, decisions and actions of the founders.

Which I presume means that some of the initial people they hired had their doubts about the product and the competence of its founders. Since those founders responded by firing them all and hiring new people, I'm starting to have doubts as well. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but if they expect the people they hire to have full confidence in their product and its founders then I don't think I meet their hiring criteria.