Thanks for the thoughtful response. I have similar reservations about PG's piece† it's application on HN suffers from overuse, compounded by invoking it has the cover of being authored by PG himself. I do think there's room for disagreement, though, and I'm confident we have the same goal: earnest, quality discussion here on HN. Cheers!
† I don't disagree the phenomenon exists, is problematic, and something to be on the lookout for, just that I don't think it's as interesting as its many references may suggest.
Grzm, there a lot of great telemedicine startups[1]. I think they should live and die on the merits of their technology, not their founder stories or plant in MSN.
I think if this article spent some time highlighting those competitors and briefly discussed their advantages / disadvantages over this one, I would have been less skeptical.
I completely agree. I think pointing out those other other startups as well as pointing out additional information you'd like the article to address (perhaps adding more information you may have) as you've done here are great additions to the discussion. Going around in circles discussing possible but unsubstantiated underhandedness is less so. As is elongating this thread for that matter, so I'll do my part in refraining from further additions.
† I don't disagree the phenomenon exists, is problematic, and something to be on the lookout for, just that I don't think it's as interesting as its many references may suggest.