You're still missing it - the crucial point is 'you had nothing to say, it was a rant'.
If you think the internet is a soapbox for you to vent your frustrations out and have people go 'yeah, me too', then you don't need to change anything at all.
If your intent was to actually give meaningful advice, then you could start with giving credentials for what qualifies you to be giving CEOs advice, followed by sharp, concise bullet points - since CEOs don't have the time to read pages of text.
> You're still missing it - the crucial point is 'you had nothing to say, it was a rant'.
Ah ok.
> If you think the internet is a soapbox for you to vent your frustrations out and have people go 'yeah, me too', then you don't need to change anything at all.
I don't think that was the gist of it, yes, it was partially written out of frustration but at the same time my inbox seems to indicate that you're the one that is missing the point here.
> If your intent was to actually give meaningful advice, then you could start with giving credentials for what qualifies you to be giving CEOs advice
If you actually are the CEO of a company you no doubt already know that my credentials don't matter even a little bit, in the end the only thing that matters is what your own counsel will tell you. And that's one of the key points there: it doesn't matter who you trust, you should verify whatever it is that you take into consideration.
> since CEOs don't have the time to read pages of text.
That's going to be tough then when the time comes to sign some important contract. Guess what, I've actually heard that excuse.
Just like another poster here already commented: if you don't like it feel free to write your own version and link it, I'll be happy to vote it up.
I think you are entirely missing both the context and content of the post as well as my response to you but in the meantime I note that you have not linked to anything you wrote yourself that better reflects what you feel needs to be said so I'll let that sit there.
My argument certainly wasn't meant as proving to you that there are 'me too's in my mailbox. It was meant - in case that wasn't clear - that what I wrote already served to help some people in a very concrete manner and as such that's a > 0 result. Which is the only reason I went through the trouble of writing this up in the first place, if it so much as gets one person on the planet to find the handbrake before it is too late then it was worth doing.
You on the other hand have merely wasted some bits with this exchange. Now take up my challenge and do something better or get of your high horse.
If you think the internet is a soapbox for you to vent your frustrations out and have people go 'yeah, me too', then you don't need to change anything at all.
If your intent was to actually give meaningful advice, then you could start with giving credentials for what qualifies you to be giving CEOs advice, followed by sharp, concise bullet points - since CEOs don't have the time to read pages of text.