← All Episodes ← Prev Next →
EPISODE 0003 - SEPT 12, 2017

Pick A Fight (on Twitter)

with David Heinemeier Hansson
Listen now

Basecamp CTO David Heinemeier Hansson is known for many things, including creating Ruby on Rails and writing business books. He also has a knack for arguing with people on the Internet. This cheerfully profane conversation explores how Twitter is like a virtual pillow to scream into and the role that extreme voices play in moving important conversations forward. We also relive some of David’s memorable Twitter melees, including the one that got him blocked by Paul Graham.

Transcript

Wailin: (00:00:00) Hi, just a quick note before we start the episode. We’re looking for questions for an upcoming mailbag episode. So, if you have a question that you would like Jason or David to answer on the air, you can leave us a voicemail at (708) 628-7850. Again, that’s (708) 628-7850. Thanks!

(00:00:23) Broken By Design by Clip Art plays.

Wailin: (00:00:25) Welcome to the REWORK podcast, a show by Basecamp about the better way to work and run your business. I’m Wailin Wong.

Shaun: (00:00:29) And I’m Shaun Hildner. Today’s episode is a little bit different. It’s a conversation between Wailin and Basecamp co-founder and CTO, David Heinemeier Hansson. You might know David for starting Ruby on Rails or writing best-selling business books. But another thing he’s extremely good at, and the topic of this conversation, is fighting with people on the internet.

(00:00:47) If you follow David on Twitter, his @dhh, by the way, you’ll see he tweets and retweets a lot of strong opinions on Silicon Valley culture, civil liberties, politics, Amercian foreign policy… you know, all of those light, non controversial topics that tend to foster the totally calm and civil discussion Twitter is so good at. And he’s developed somewhat of a reputation for being somewhat of a Twitter agitator.

Wailin: (00:01:06) Now, we’re not advocating, necessarily that you get on social media and start blasting away as a business strategy. Your mileage will vary quite a bit. For me, as a woman and someone with much thinner skin than David, getting into Twitter fights is probably not adviseable. But I do like reading certain types of Twitter fights, like the kind that David gets into. And we at Basecamp are generally pro-having strong opinions. So, let’s make some popcorn and dive in. Oh, and as a head’s up, there is a healthy amount of cussing in this interview. So, don’t let your kids listen, unless you want them to become masters of fighting on Twitter. Okay, here’s my interview with David.

(00:01:51) I looked up when you joined. It was in 2008, which is pretty early days. Do you remember what it was like when you first joined? Like, what the vibe was like?

David: (00:01:59) Well, the fun thing was that even before that join date, I had a different account that one of the early developers of Twitter set up for me when they first got going. When, I think it was still in beta. And I just totally didn’t get it. Like, they pitched it as this thing, oh, you can tell your friends when you’re at the bar and it’ll show up as an SMS on their phone. I’m like, yeah, okay, I’m not meeting that many friends at bars that don’t know that I’m going there… it just didn’t make any sense to me at all. So, I kind of just blew it off for a couple years. I don’t know what sucked me back in. Probably a link to some tweet where I just went, oh, that’s really interesting. Oh, this person’s on Twitter? Okay, let me sign up and follow.

(00:02:36) So, at the outset it wasn’t because I wanted to say something in 140 characters, it’s because I wanted to listen to people say things in 140 characters. And it just took a while before I got into a groove with it. But then, I’ve come to really appreciate Twitter. And especially the 140 characters. That’s just the perfect, pithy format. Especially when you sort of have these gut reactions on things. Which, I have a lot of. I’ve described Twitter in the past as my pillow. Like, I’m screaming into the pillow. Not really so much for other people to listen to that, although some choose. More for me just to get it out of my system. To release that.

(00:03:18) Then, of course, what happens is that you release these screams for the pillow into the wild and a lot of people sort of, maybe have a different opinion of that. And that ends up in some jousting.

Wailin: (00:03:29) What was your primary vehicle for screaming into a pillow, metaphorically, before you had Twitter? Was it through Signal v. Noise, the company blog, or did you have some other avenues for that?

David: (00:03:41) Blogging was definitely one of them. Anyone who is, I don’t know, fortunate or unfortunate enough to go to lunch with me would be a good sort of 20 minutes to start a tirade about something. And then, otherwise, just having it sort of trapped in my head. Which, maybe that was for the better, but um… now it is getting out there on Twitter and it’s just—it’s a release to have thoughts and ideas and shooting them out there and then just like, go, okay. I can move on. It’s not like, trapped bouncing around inside my skull that I have some take on something. Which may very well be an ill-considered take. I think the great thing about Twitter is that all of it is first draft, and that’s really what I use it for a lot, which is to just… both for myself and to gauge the reaction, get that initial take on something. Mm, I have an idea here, is there anything to it? In many of the same ways that I think stand-up comedians use smaller clubs and you hone your material and then if there’s something there. If a joke really bites, then you turn it into something else. It becomes a bigger thing and then it becomes a part of your routine.

(00:04:49) I think, since I started on Twitter in 2008, a bunch of the ideas that ended up becoming blog posts or even keynotes or any other outlets that we have for these things, turned out being turned into books, they started as tweets.

Wailin: (00:05:03) It seems like the appeal for Twitter is really the temporal nature of it. That it’s quick, it lets you get out these gut feelings and they’re a potential germ for something more, but they don’t have to be. And it’s interesting because I don’t think everyone approaches Twitter like that. Do you look at your past tweets as being like, that existed in the past and I have every right to have a different viewpoint now that’s just as strong as the one I had in the past? And how do you deal with people who are like, “Well, you said this in 2009.”

David: (00:05:33) Yeah, I think that’s what’s so funny about it. And in some ways a little deceiving. Twitter presents as it is this temporal thing that you just, oh 140 characters and they just scroll off. Yeah, they scroll off until someone digs a 10-year-old tweet back up, right? And in some cases that’s all good fun and games. And in other cases, I think it does encourage some rigidity. I mean, the most prolific cases are of course politicians and in that case, perhaps that’s more valid that you call out when there is a change in position. But I think for most humans, I mean, I’ve been there for now 10 years-ish. I have, what, 40,000 tweets, or something?

(00:06:09) I sure as hell do not believe all the things. I mean, a lot of things I put out on Twitter, I don’t believe ten minutes later. You think I believe it ten years later? No.

Wailin: (00:06:17) Like what? What have you changed your mind about ten minutes later?

David: (00:06:20) All sorts of things. Exactly because Twitter serves as that gut reaction, and the gut reaction sometimes is completely counter to the intellectual reaction which comes ten minutes later. Almost 40,000 tweets, I would be shocked if there was not a great percentage, perhaps even a majority of those tweets that no longer stand up. Not only just at large, but also to myself and I wouldn’t tweet that today, or I don’t think that today. I’ve had a couple of takes over the years that then people latch onto whenever they want to say something about an opinion I have right now. They’ll, go, like, didn’t you, for example, say that Facebook was not worth 33 billion dollars, like, eight years ago? As though that has some relevance to the topic we’re discussing right now. Except as to say, we’re all humans and like, humans do not have a perfect record over 40,000 tweets of getting every utterance 100% correct, sort of mapped out.

(00:07:22) So, I think that that’s kind of like—that’s actually not a bonus. That’s not a feature that I think is fitting for Twitter. In many ways I think Twitter would be better if it was more like Snapchat and things just disappeared. Because that’s the presentation it has. And I think that’s how a lot of people tweet it… think about it, too, right? So, I mean, I have a little bit of an ambivalent relationship with it and I think Twitter is terrible for all sorts of reasons, but it’s also absolutely wonderful for a different set of reasons. And if I am to choose any outlet for those gut reactions, Twitter’s just a slam-dunk for me.

(00:08:00) I mean, maybe I should not choose any outlet, and that’s a very fair argument, too. But, here we are.

Wailin: (00:08:05) Here we are. Did you ever argue with people in the comments of the blog?

David: (00:08:11) The early days of Signal v. Noise in particular. In the early days, I mean, we really put it on a point. In part because the early blog posts on Signal v. Noise were kind of halfway between the stuff we’re writing now and halfway towards a Tweet. Because I would write a blog post in like three minutes and it would be four paragraphs and it would have a lot of the same edge as a tweet will and a lot of the same lack of nuance because we’re just sketching. I’m not fucking putting together a Michaelangelo masterpiece here that’s gonna take me seven years to complete, right? I’m just doing a really quick sketch in three minutes on a topic I have in my head and that comes out on the blog.

(00:08:51) So, obviously that led to a lot of the same situations where people then went back and forth, and like, oh no, you’re wrong. Of course, first of all, we were wrong some of the time, right? And part of the time we were also just right in ways that people found offensive. That led to a lot of good back and forth debates.

(00:09:12) What’s great about Twitter is, you have 140 characters and it’s much easier to ignore people. And I’ve gotten much better at that over the years. When I first started at Twitter, I totally just dove into every god-damned Twitter fight I could find, right? And just started punching. Because in some ways it was not just the Twitter fight, it was also just the sparring. It was kind of like you were honing your argument and people pushing or punching back was actually beneficial because you got to cover more angles of it and then when you took that idea and put it into another form, it was weathered, right? It’d taken some punches and that was helpful for a time. And then at some point I just had this realization, like, it’s 11:30 at night and I’m arguing with fucking strangers on Twitter about something stupid that I don’t give a shit whether they get or not. Like, I’m not talking to you.

(00:09:56) Which is a lot of the sort of the origins we talked about, that pillow. Right, like? I’m talking to myself. If you want to listen, subscribe. If you don’t want to listen, don’t subscribe. Either way, I can’t care about what every single person who follows me thinks about something. Or, I can, but that’s just very draining and I’ll end up not tweeting in the end.

(00:10:15) So, I had this realization at one point, hey wait a minute. Oh, I can just not reply. I don’t have to respond to everyone. Which was totally my initial instinct in the beginning. For the first many years, perhaps half the time or more that I’ve used Twitter, my instinct was that if someone replied, like, I’d give back, and…

Wailin: (00:10:34) But even if it was someone with three followers—

David: (00:10:37) Totally.

Wailin: (00:10:39) Doesn’t matter for this—

David: (00:10:39) I’d have death matches on Twitter. People would have one followers. I mean follower count is not representative of whether someone has a good argument or not. I think there is some correlation in the grand mass scheme of things. That, the people who just joined or are mostly just shouting at people and not putting out their own intellectual input can drag you into Twitter matches that are not that beneficial.

(00:11:02) I’ll occasionally indulge in some type of Twitter back and forth—[inaudible] it is valuable. It’s one of those things with Twitter where on the one hand I kind of think, like, oh, wouldn’t it actually be better if you just couldn’t reply to people? And I think it would, to some extent. And then to other extents, it is also great that you do get these punches from left and right and you go, like, oh, I didn’t even consider that. Like, the arguments end up better in some of the cases and in some of the cases, you just get worn out and like, what the hell am I doing here? Why am I fighting with people on the interwebs?

(00:11:32) That’s why Twitter is, I think, special. Is that it’s not just a universal good. It’s horrible in so many ways, and then is also wonderful in a lot of other ways and that’s just a very interesting place for a product to be.

Wailin: (00:11:45) Your mentions are probably nightmare and you don’t want to respond to all of them. You might not even want to read all of them. But every once in a while, someone might have a really good question you want to answer. How do you manage your mentions?

David: (00:11:56) It’s not actually that hard. I mean, I get maybe, on a crazy day, I’ll get a few hundred mentions. You can scroll through that pretty quick. I mean, most people follow more people on Twitter than that. Like, they’ll scroll through more than 200 tweets in a given day. In fact, that’s one of the parts of Twitter, I don’t understand. I follow maybe 130 people, 140 people. I read most of it. Like, I’ll scan my entire timeline start to finish. Then I see people who follow like 5,000 people. I hadn’t even considered that use of Twitter. Like, you kind of just dip in and then you get whatever flows in the river at that time. Kind of explains a little bit more of how some of these media accounts are just incessant about the constant god-damned retweeting of their same articles. Like, that was one of the funnier Twitter fights I got into, which was with the Economist.

Wailin: (00:12:42) You got into a Twitter fight with the Economist?

David: (00:12:44) I did. Because I was following the Economist on Twitter and since I read my timeline start to finish it started annoying me that I had seen the same god-damned article retweeted like seven, what did I count. I shouldn’t overstate it. Maybe it was like nine times over three days. I go like, you know what? That’s fucking spam. Why are you doing this? Well, again, I took it just like any Twitter person would do. Why are you doing this to me? As if the entire universe revolved around my usecase of Twitter. And then I just started beefing with them on Twitter and I started talking to the managing editor, whoever, who was also on Twitter, which is this wonderful thing about Twitter, right? You can reach these kind of people where, like, I’m not going to just bump into the managing editor at like, the Chicago sandwich shop and have a conversation about this stuff. And we went back and forth for a while, and it ended up in this wonderful place where—and now, I’m totally taking credit for the idea which may be a complete ego-maniac thing to do. But after that conversation, at least shortly thereafter they launched EconomistOnce which was basically an alternate feed where they just tweet the articles one time, and that’s it. And now I think there’s like 60 or 70,000 people following that. That was probably one of the best outcome Twitter “fights” I had. Which, it wasn’t really a fight, I mean. We were just kind of arguing loudly in 140 characters.

(00:14:00) Which is the other thing about Twitter is that it’s sometimes hard to discern what is a fight and what is just, like I have 140 characters, I can’t couch it in all this normal socially acceptable ways of speaking that normal humans employ when they talk like we’re talking, now, right? And that’s why a lot of Twitter arguments look like fights even if they aren’t.

Wailin: (00:14:21) So, it’s like, in your head, you’re not having a fight but to the outside world it probably looks like some huge fight.

David: (00:14:27) Yes. It’s really rare, actually, that I have an actual Twitter fight where I’m like, this person is a fucking idiot and I’m going to try to punch through 140 characters until at least the rest of the world realizes that this is the case.

Wailin: (00:14:42) Uh, do you have a memorable example of that?

David: (00:14:44) The most recent one I think that got a little heated in a way where I’d go, okay, that’s a Twitter fight was Keith Rabois. I think Rabois, or… Silicon Valley VC that’s worked at a bunch of companies. And, funny thing about these Twitter fights is it’s very rare that I remember how they start. Like, you just remember, and then, oh, I was Twitter fighting. Like, how could I come to find myself in this place…

Wailin: (00:15:06) It’s like, did you ever see Inception where they talk about how you never remember the beginning of the dream. That’s exactly…

David: (00:15:10) That is exactly how most Twitter fights go. So, anyway, I found myself fighting with Keith about sustainable work patterns and whether people take vacation and whether working 120 hours a week was a good or a bad thing. And I was talking pretty ferociously, which is often the case with these Twitter fights, is that it’s not novel terrain. Like, I will have some opinion on something that I’ve formed over the last 15 years, so it’s in fairly good fighting shape by the time it’s getting unleashed on Twitter, on some sort of topic. So, anyway, we got onto this thing about sustainable work practices and I knew it was a Twitter fight because—not just because I was engaged with it, but because the replies I was getting from Keith were like, “If you see David talking, or his mouth is moving, you know he’s lying.” And you’re like, oh, damn, right. Now it’s on.

(00:16:04) Another example of a Twitter fight I had which was how I got blocked by Paul Graham, which is a topic that’s come up again recently here. Because this is another one of the things where I follow 140 people and I read my entire timeline and people follow like 5,000 and dip in and out of the timeline. Well, I’ve blocked maybe 100 people on Twitter in the ten years I’ve been on it.

Wailin: (00:16:28) What merits a blocking from you?

David: (00:16:30) Usually someone just screaming obscenities. I think that’s it. Actually I was trying to think, like, actually, who have I actually blocked. Like, I think that’s the main threshold. Well, other people have other thresholds, and some of those thresholds are very very low. And especially, I mean, that was where this whole argument with Paul Graham came up that his threshold is certainly in a different galaxy than my threshold. That doesn’t necessarily make it wrong it just measn that like anything, that should be open to critique. If you want to partake in the common discussion here, if you want to enjoy having a bunch of followers and Twitter, you should also at least open yourself up to being part of that discussion and your use of Twitter is a legitimate discussion point.

(00:17:14) It’s a funny thing because I thought I had a pretty good relationship with Paul Graham over the years.

Wailin: (00:17:18) Have you met him before?

David: (00:17:19) I’ve met him several times, and I went to his start-up school talk in 2008 and met him at a couple other conferences. We’ve even traded emails on some other contentious issues. Of course, that has happens, I suppose to a lot of relationships, whether those are virtual or otherwise. This Trump thing happens, right? And it wasn’t so much the Trump thing. It was just the fact that Peter Thiel, right? So, Peter Thiel, a partner at YCombinator, I think even just that. That would have gained me a block. At this point, I think anyone who says Peter Thiel is a partner at YCombinator—blocked! Blocked!

Wailin: (00:17:54) Just like, a statement of objective fact?

David: (00:17:56) Well. I think the thing is that fact is unflattering, and then it gets rewritten. Oh, no, it’s actually—I don’t know what the fuck the euphemism is. Part-time partner, I think it is. Like that sort of thing, like, oh, no no no, he’s not a partner at all. It’s a part-time partner. It’s completely different.

Wailin: (00:18:12) He’s barely involved.

David: (00:18:13) Exactly, right? And then you go back and read the press release, like, oh, we’re so thankful that Peter Thiel’s on board, this is the best thing ever. And just, you point those things—well, I pointed those things out in a pointed way, right? Others might say annoying, and I wouldn’t say that necessarily is an unfair characterization of it. And we just had a fair back and forth, right? And it ended up with me getting blocked. It went over for days, right? It wasn’t even—and we dragged in multiple people. Sam—

Wailin: (00:18:40) Sam Altman?

David: (00:18:41) Yes, Altman. At some point, Paul was like, well, I don’t even make these decisions, it’s Sam’s fault! And then, like, Sam got in, and it’s just—it’s kind of like a WWF wrestling match, where you’re like, tag-team boosh! And then you see another at mention and this person just barges into the ring and starts throwing chairs.

Wailin: (00:18:58) I’ll avoid the obvious Hulk Hogan joke.

David: (00:19:00) Yes. Well, which, there’s actually a funny—maybe this is why things were already on edge because I had already been in Gawker’s corner, at least in part on the Peter Thiel funding these lawsuits and so on. Like, is this the kind of person you want on YCombinator, and anyway. This whole thing leads to Paul Graham giving me a block, and then just, I learned that there’s a whole community of people on Twitter, of people who’ve gotten blocked by Paul Graham.

Wailin: (00:19:24) You just don’t take anything personally, which I think, for a lot of other people would be the number one thing that would make them unable to fight on Twitter, the way you do. If they wanted to use Twitter in this way. But you don’t take anything personally. Like, Keith, this VC, was on Twitter saying that “everything that comes out of DHH’s mouth is a lie” and I think he might have also called you a failure.

David: (00:19:49) Yes.

Wailin: (00:19:50) But it’s like, you don’t care.

David: (00:19:52) I think part of it is because I start from a position of not caring. Like, I don’t know, I don’t know Keith. What bearing does anything he has to say have on my life. I would just give someone power over me if I cared about whatever it is that they had to say from this context, right? But, I mean, I know clearly that this is an abnormal take. Like, my wife sometimes, she follows me on Twitter and she sees fights and she sometimes goes, “Oh shit.” Right, like, she sometimes gets anxious when there are these public spats and I just go, like, what is the matter? First of all, no one reads this in the grand scheme of things, right? Even for the people who do read it, like they’ve forgotten it in five minutes. And even for the ones who didn’t forget it in five minutes. This is an important topic, like, for example, the thing with Keith, standing up for sustainable, sane, healthy work practices? Like? Isn’t that worth fighting for. What do I care whether he says I’m a liar because of that. That doesn’t really matter.

(00:20:55) I think perhaps that gets to the other point of what I think is interesting with Twitter beefs is that they’re very rarely between the two people. I’m not talking to Keith. I’m not going to convince someone like Keith of anything, right? And to be fair, he’s unlikely to convince me that not taking a vacation for 21 years is this glorious goal that I should aspire to. So, that’s a mutual level of impenetrability in terms of the argument, but there’s all the spectators. That’s who I argue on Twitter for. That’s sort of, to call this out and just go, for people who haven’t thought about it, who were at… perhaps casually just drifted into this notion that, like, oh, it’s so glorious to work 120 hours a week. So, at least that they know like, oh! There are people out there who don’t think like this. Who actually do work 40 hours a week? Or like, oh, that’s interesting. And then maybe that’s a trail of bread crumbs that can lead to them discovering some other sources and then forming a broader perspective and whatever on the topic. So… at least, that’s how I justify it, right?

Wailin: (00:21:54) Yeah.

David: (00:21:54) Part of it is also, I just, I find it fun. I’ve always liked to just argue. And, you’ve just got to recognize the limitations and the constraints of the domain and again realize that like, okay, I’m not going to convince Keith, or… even Paul that he should have kicked Thiel’s ass off YCombinator long ago. And okay, that’s fine. And then we hopefully have a chance to influence other people to make a more informed decision.

Wailin: (00:22:21) Yeah. Another thing I wanted to ask you about is, and we talked about this a little bit before, this idea that you don’t have to engage with everyone or reply to everyone. Because you don’t swing at every pitch, which, I think is a really hard thing for a lot of other people to learn. And I remember that there was someone on—like, a famous internet provocateur who kind of came out, guns a blazing and said, no one should listen to DHH on tech culture because Basecamp barely has any women on their team and you probably remember this, right? And also the Ruby on Rails community is very misogynistic, so no one should listen to him, ever. And, internally here at Basecamp, it kicked up a lot of feelings and people were like, oh, should we engage? This is making me really upset. And you came in, and you were like, nope! We don’t have to engage, and not only that, you said that her voice was really necessary. Voices on the extreme ends of things and that you’re happy to support those voices and be that punching bag and let your silence sort of do a specific thing. Can you talk about that approach and whether you came to that approach over time?

David: (00:23:33) I mean, we don’t even have to talk in abstracts here. I believe it was—

Wailin: (00:23:38) Shanley.

David: (00:23:38) Shanley. So, Shanley has, for a long time, been, I think the euphemism for this is an activist voice, where she—is a euphemism often for shit-talking and whatever, which I can sympathize with in all sorts of ways because I’ve played a version of that role in other domains. So, when Ruby on Rails first got kicked off in 2003, 2004, like, there were a lot of stances I took in those early days that were very combative. And they were very combative because I was trying to move the goalposts. I was trying to move the Overton Window of what we can debate and what we can’t debate. Some things that seem very grounded in hard concrete that weren’t going to just move if I was blowing at it. I need to apply force for this to move. Even to the point where some of the positions were so blunt that they totally lacked nuance. But, I find that that’s often the activist dynamite that actually moves the mountains we need to move sometimes.

(00:24:40) Even if you don’t agree with the actual point that’s being made, you can still recognize, like, you know what? I think this is actually—this is necessary. So, I find that Twitter activism, the brand that someone like Shanley promotes, it’s not that that in itself is going to change the whole picture. It is one part of it.

(00:25:00) So, if you take on one hand a topic like diversity in technology, there’s some very extreme positions on that where I would think that a lot of people read them and go, like, well, that’s out there. That’s wild. For sort of a broad mainstream appeal, it’s not going to hit directly. But it can sort of hit indirectly. It hits from the flanks and then it opens up the space in the middle for people who do come with less inflammatory arguments and with sort of less extreme versions of the same grievances and people go, like, oh, actually, that’s reasonable.

(00:25:35) Where, without those flamethrowers and Molotov coctails, and so on, they would never have had a platform. So, I think that that’s—at least that’s the ecosystem of this activism and debate that I view it through.

(00:25:48) And I just go, do you also know, to be that person out there pushing when no one else is pushing, you’re not going to be the most reason-headed, sane person. That’s just. Most people don’t do that, right? Most people are more timid and more within the bounds of mainstream conversational style, and like, oh, let’s not offend people. I still recognize the need and the benefit that people on sort of the far fringes bring.

(00:26:21) Which, I mean. Let’s also be fair that that plays the whole way around and usually when the fringe is not on our side of the argument we don’t look too kindly at that, right? Like, that person is fucking insane. Right? And, but then, when it’s a topic we enjoy, we’re like, oh, they’re really speaking truth to power, and like, yeah, that’s how it works, and I think that that’s okay. So, when it comes to whether—what my part in that is, right? I can at least see, okay, hey, I played a similar, related, or fringe role at some point in the evolution of some ideas that I was trying to push. I should recognize that other people are going to do that on things that are in many ways more consequential, right? So, I can forgive the heightened tension and whatever, air around that and just go, I can observe it from a meta perspective. I don’t have to react to every individual tweet that might—if you just read one individual tweet, you’d go, like, that is just incredibly offensive, not productive, not helpful, not anything. But then you see it in this larger picture of, like, oh, well, it’s not just this person. This person plays one role in this whole ensemble of people who are trying to push for change.

(00:27:37) Broken By Design by Clip Art plays.

Wailin: (00:27:37) I think that’s all I had.

David: (00:27:39) Excellent.

Wailin: (00:27:39) Anything else you want to get off your chest on this topic?

David: (00:27:42) If I think of something, it’ll come out in 140 characters after the show, I’m sure.

Wailin: (00:27:45) Okay. Thank you.

David: (00:27:46) Awesome.

Wailin: (00:27:48) That’s it for this episode of REWORK. If you’d like to follow David on Twitter, he’s at @dhh. I’ll post links to some of the arguments he referenced in the show notes for this episode, which you can find at rework.fm. If you’d like to go on Apple Podcasts and leave us a nice review, we would love it. And if you want to complain about the show, please direct your comments to David on Twitter. Oh, and, again, please remember to send in your mailbag questions. The number, if you need it again, is (708) 628-7850. I’ll see you back here in two weeks.

Shaun: (00:28:26) REWORK is produced by Wailin Wong and me, Shaun Hildner. Our theme music is Broken By Design by Clip Art. You can catch up on all our episodes at our website rework.fm and follow us on Twitter at @reworkpodcast.

This is an episode title

00:00 / 00:00