[disgruntledphd2]

yeah, after reading that thread I have no idea what Benedict Evans thinks a VC is and isn't.

Does anyone understand this?

[jdminhbg]

Evans is distinguishing between people who are full-time VCs, and anyone who has ever written a check to a business that doesn't have revenue yet.

[fjdjsmsm]

A part time carpenter is still a carpenter. Evans claim wasn’t that Murdoch is an amateur. His claim was that Murdoch was categorically not involved with VC.

[jdminhbg]

If you write an article titled "Electricians Are Turning Homes Into Firetraps" and then cite the fact that I improperly swapped out an outlet in my home as evidence that I'm an electrician, you should expect pushback.

[disgruntledphd2]

But the article works equally well for Uber or Lyft or indeed We work, all of which were funded by professional VCs.

I really like Ben Evans, but he's ignoring the main thrust of the article and nitpicking about definitions.

That's rarely a sign of someone who has a strong argument against a piece.

[jdminhbg]

If it works equally well for Uber or Lyft or WeWork, then trying to shoehorn Theranos in since it's a spectacular fraud that doesn't really fit the definition was a bad decision.

That's rarely a sign of a piece that makes a strong argument.

[disgruntledphd2]

The article covered WeWork much, much more extensively than Theranos.

I know its against the guidelines, but did you read the article?