b8608ade05d2…

This is what good business practice is.

Owners should always be open to feedback so that their customers or viewers or whatever feel apart of the product. It also helps to make sure that the word of mouth is positive, and not negative. They should be searching to perfect their product. Thats what good business is. It’s not just having a good product or service, you need to do more than that to have something special.

Changes that you make are not always going to be received with open armed support but how can you expect them to be? What is in your best interests might not be in the viewers.

Now this is truly WEB 2.0!”

That is common business sense and has almost nothing to do with web2.0 anything. I guess proctor and gamble are “web 2.0″ too since they listen to their customers and change the product to better meet customer needs.

I do agree that if he keeps pushing crunchgear on the TC blog then it will take away some quality from TC but not that much for it to be an issue.

When you look at it, it seems like it is a common idea that they don’t like the advertisements coming through the posts.

Maybe you could opt to add something similar to TechCrunch like you do with CrunchBoard, but with updates from GrunchGear?

Blake I fully understand it takes time and good luck with it - I just expect to come to TechCrunch for Web 2.0 information, not the other sites in his network.

But apart from that, keep up the good work

TalkCrunch just might be the next addition to the “dead pool”! Hey.. at least you can blog about it on TechCrunch =P

I love that about you Mike, even when you lose you win =)

My take on this thread is that Michael cannot announce the opening of one his own sites? That’s sad! But, could it be there is a little bit of envy here? Forget that I didn’t say that!

The truth, however, is that CrunchGear is a “new” site…and it looks kinda Web 2.0 as it does allow comments (It’s more like a blog, however.). So, TECHNICALLY, he is doing his job.

I say, let’s give the guy some slack!

If he continues to “advertise” CrunchGear in the “articles” section, I say then we have a beef.

An observation: Isn’t it interesting how WE have taken some possession of this site? The tenor of the conversation is that of people who feel they actually own a share in the site. That Michael (who is the owner) has made some changes that we don’t like has caused us to comment. Michael, in turn, is LISTENING and, in turn, making new changes to reflect what WE want.

Now this is truly WEB 2.0!

I’m sad this is your response to such an overwhelming reaction from your readers. I can only speak for myself, and I’m no troll at all. Usually I don’t even publish my website URL so my comments aren’t considered splog.

I would really like to see your content getting better, that’s it!

I understanding your are trying to expand your blog network and CrunchGear “isn’t on all of the press lists yet, so the new news isn’t getting to them all the time. That will change in the coming months.” - but still TechCrunch is just that - focusing on Web 2.0 and start ups.

Your site generates huge impressions based on user’s coming here to read commentary specifically related to Web 2.0 - not on posts that remain for 6/7 hours at the top of your blog relating to other blogs you are running.

Don’t get me wrong Mike, I know you are trying to establish a business here - but remember that your business is your readers, don’t acuse us of “being a 100% negative comment group” because its a vast generalisation that isn’t credible.

Listen to what we are saying - and let’s keep TechCrunch rolling on with great stuff

A few thoughts. Most of you are known trolls on this and other blogs. You only say negative things, and you say them often. You haven’t crossed the line into threatening my life territory, so the comments haven’t been deleted. But what you are saying is just washed out by your overwhelming and constant negativity.

For the guys who are asking “how is crunchgear different?”…well, in a few ways. Remember the site is only a week old and the editor, John, was out here for our party for most of that week. Once things settle down you will see weekly product comparisons, sort of face-offs between mp3 players, cell phones, whatever. The business models of the other guys, which just pay a very small fee per post, don’t incentivize those kinds of posts because they are much harder to do.

In the end, John’s vision for CrunchGear is a cross between a blog and a CNET reviews, with a lot of subjectivity.

And a note on how we are copying Gizmodo and engadget. There are two reasons for this. The first is that those guys, particularly engadget, rarely link to eachother even though they steal stories all the time. We’ll never do that. If something is interesting, we’ll write about it, but there will always be a link. It’s something John and I strongly agree on and a core principle of techcrunch sites.

The second reason is that CrunchGear is just getting started and isn’t on all of the press lists yet, so the new news isn’t getting to them all the time. That will change in the coming months.

Some of the comments are pretty intense and some were trying to be nice.

I do agreed that CrunchGear is a day late with their gizmos and gadgets post. I see more or less the same items from Gizmodo 2-3 days earlier.

JohnD

I think something is seriously strange with that? No idea but you are talking 235,000 different DOMAIN NAMES?????????

BTW - Comment King - way to not add value to a thread, good job!