u/Past-Rutabaga4646 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
[https://larslofgren.com/codesmith-reddit-reputation-attack/](https://larslofgren.com/codesmith-reddit-reputation-attack/) >It's a neutral, factual summary Sure buddy. When are you gonna let this die? Talk about petty
u/michaelnovati replied · DELETED · archived copy ★ FEATURED
The blog post does not even mention this lawsuit and the examples it uses attributes incorrectly to causing millions of dollars of revenue loss are out of context comments that received dozens to hundreds of 'view counts' compared to negative Codesmith posts **from other people** that received tens of thousands of views.
It's up to you to decide if the lawsuit was relevant during this period of decline, but leaving it out of that blog post does not give you the information needed to do that.
That is clearly tunnel vision blog post that started with a narrative around motivations that I believe is false and then worked backwards. In middle school that's how you fail essay writing.
Codesmith's CEO emailed me several months before that blog post when we discussed it and said: "I do not consider Formation a competitor, it is quite clear to me that our products are different."
If you want my opinions about the lawsuit, I have many, and I'm not sharing them.
For example, this is not an opinion, but a fact, that a founder trying to raise new capital will need to explain why they sold 70% of their company for $900K, when the standard silicon valley investment would be a single digit percentage for that amount. If you all want to defend Codesmith instead of being humble about mistakes and growing from them, then you likely won't succeed in this industry. You have accept your mistakes, take feedback, grow, improve.
Finally, trying to flip the table around to personal attacks **instead of addressing the substance** is not a valid way to prove a point.