Whether we like it or not, the truth of the matter is that telling is just as important as doing.
I'm a little unsure whether you mean "doing and then telling", or "telling in lieu of doing". It's confusing because the context is Curtis sort of unveiling some sort of blogging platform.
If the latter, it is notable that telling drowns out doing. Telling is a very poor substitute for doing anything, and pundits like Curtis, Gruber, that Microsoft-loving guy who I can't remember, Jeff Atwood...these guys have as little significance -- for their telling -- as a sports commentator who insists that the Yankees are the best. That's great, speak to your community and all, but utterly meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
The trick is in trying to pivot your success building, essentially, followers, into success doing, which Atwood did to great success, and Curtis is now trying (Gruber is still stuck trying to pitch t-shirts). Good for Dustin to make that change, however the very valid comment that many have, as quoted in the article, is "why should this get hype?". Why should we assume that Curtis has any insight or particular value building a blogging platform just because he got a tonne of links for a highly suspect defense of 3.5" smartphone screens.
John Gruber makes a quite decent living selling ads around his punditry--he doesn't need to sell t-shirts. His "telling" isn't about what he does, but what Apple does. So his "doing" is "telling." ;-)
He also invented what's turned into the latest quite successful ascii markup language (Markdown). That's pretty good doing, establishing a useful standard.
Why should we assume that Curtis has any insight or particular value building a blogging platform
I think Svbtle can be judged on its own merits. Did it have particular value for you or not? That's the key question.
My point was more that if you think Svbtle has value, it shouldn't be dismissed just on the grounds that Dustin Curtis is a pundit. Because being a good pundit has value as well in itself.
Of course, if you think Svbtle sucks, then no amount of hype will be able to change your mind, and that's the way it should be.
My point was more that if you think Svbtle has value, it shouldn't be dismissed just on the grounds that Dustin Curtis is a pundit.
And on that point I think everyone agrees. The people you are replying to aren't saying that it has no merit because Curtis is a pundit. They are saying that it doesn't have merit because he is a pundit.
I saw that unknown, unqualified project of completely unknown merit linked and heralded across the net. Why? It certainly isn't standing on its own at this point.
Right, but I'm not sure if the distinction is always that clear. Having a negative opinion about him because "he hasn't done anything" can also easily color your perception of Svbtle itself (insert link to Wikipedia page about some psychology principle here).
And I might be wrong, but I thought that the publicity was due in big part to the Svbtle vs Obtvse controversy. If he got all that coverage just by being Dustin Curtis then I guess I'm even more impressed with him…
I'm a little unsure whether you mean "doing and then telling", or "telling in lieu of doing". It's confusing because the context is Curtis sort of unveiling some sort of blogging platform.
If the latter, it is notable that telling drowns out doing. Telling is a very poor substitute for doing anything, and pundits like Curtis, Gruber, that Microsoft-loving guy who I can't remember, Jeff Atwood...these guys have as little significance -- for their telling -- as a sports commentator who insists that the Yankees are the best. That's great, speak to your community and all, but utterly meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
The trick is in trying to pivot your success building, essentially, followers, into success doing, which Atwood did to great success, and Curtis is now trying (Gruber is still stuck trying to pitch t-shirts). Good for Dustin to make that change, however the very valid comment that many have, as quoted in the article, is "why should this get hype?". Why should we assume that Curtis has any insight or particular value building a blogging platform just because he got a tonne of links for a highly suspect defense of 3.5" smartphone screens.