

I'm going to be on Mixergy today at 11am PDT - jl
http://ycombinator.posterous.com/im-going-to-interviewed-on-mixergy-tomorrow-a

======
e1ven
I tend to enjoy the Mixergy interviews, but I find that Andrew is often too
self-focused. It's somewhat jarring when he uses his access to people to say
"What do you think of My site, or My Style?"

I understand the temptation; I'm not saying I wouldn't necessarily want to do
the same thing, but when George Stephanopoulos interviews Obama or Putin, he
doesn't ask if they watch his show.

I also understand that it's reasonable to use your own site/startup/etc as an
example of the larger world, but it seems somewhat unslightly. This may be a
place where avoiding the appearance of conflict is best, even if it would
otherwise make sense.

~~~
AndrewWarner
I recently tried 99designs for the first time. They have an unusual model, but
every time I was about to get confused, I noticed that their UI cleared up my
issue.

I couldn't figure out how they made their site so intuitive.

Then, after I paid for my design, I got an email from them asking me to fill
out a Wufoo survey.

That's when I realized how they know their customers well because they keep
asking for feedback.

That's why I keep asking for feedback. I could do it off camera, after the
interview is over, but I'd much rather be open about my process than hide it.

~~~
e1ven
That's a great point, and I agree that it's always important to get feedback,
and that's why I'm glad that you're here on HN discussing the interviews.

One thing to be careful of, however, is making sure you're not disrupting your
primary user experience to gather the information.

In your 99designs example, it sounds like they did everything right. They
presented a clear, kick-ass UI that guided you through things without being in
the way, without cluttering things up with surveys while you tried to do it.

Sometimes I worry that you're in-interview questions are more akin to having
99designs offering a dropdown menu next to each UI element, asking for
feedback ;)

Best of luck, and thanks for doing these.

------
jakarta
Andrew gets a lot of criticism for how he interviews but I have to say,
interviewing people -- especially when you are new at it is hard.

You really have to strike a balance in the questions you ask and the small
talk you make to get a good flow going and make the person being interviewed
willing to talk.

I have a feeling that some people on here would rather him simply read a list
of 10 questions, but the problem with that is you often end up with really
mechanical answers. Some people will argue he is too nice with the people he
interviews, but if you press too hard you will sever relationships and reduce
future prospects for interviewing the same individual or people from their
network. Good interviewing is really an art.

So before you criticize, try doing interviews yourself.

And I don't quite understand all the hate Mixergy attracts. I mean all he is
doing is providing extra information for the benefit of everyone else via his
interviews. You might not find it useful, but I am sure other people do.

For the record, I don't watch most of Andrew's videos. I mostly skim the
transcripts. Some people complain about transcript quality but I know that
good transcription services cost money and what Andrew's interviews are
free... You get what you pay for.

------
faramarz
There's no question that Andrew is creating value with Mixery. No one can
dispute that.

Andrew, take all the criticism in stride. these are people who care enough to
even bother complaining. any criticism is better than nothing at all.

With that frame of mind, you'll get further in creating value for your peers.

Keep it up.

------
riso
Being an introvert, I find that there is way too much small talk than I am
interested in. I really think that most of the interviews could be trimmed
down to 15-20min.

Now only if there was a highlight reel of the interview...

------
sk_0919
Andrew, How about an HN-like board where people can up-vote any questions
posted by other users in the live chat room. You can have a section in the
interview where the top voted questions can be asked

------
Oompa
Am I the only one that doesn't like Mixergy?

~~~
brandon272
I watch some of the interviews. I would say what is best about Mixergy is that
Andrew Warner works hard on the site and does an excellent job at having a
steady stream of high quality guests. On the other hand, I don't particularly
enjoy his interview style because I find the questions to be too high-level
and "fluffy" most of the time. I'd enjoy the interviews a lot more if the
questions were more about specific operational issues that startups deal with.
But, that's just my opinion and the interview style is really a matter of
personal taste.

~~~
AndrewWarner
Brandon, are you free for a phone call to talk about what you think I should
improve in my interviews?

Since you don't reveal your identity in your HN bio, we could use a disposable
skype name to maintain your anonymity.

<http://mixergy.com/contact>

~~~
jjs
I saw the live interview and it was great.

It seems to me that the charges of fluffiness come not necessarily from
"softball" questions, but from the _impression_ that the questions are
strictly softball.

Seeing you interview, it's very obvious that you're a genuinely nice guy. You
couldn't hide that without changing yourself for the worse. But you don't have
to, because it's an asset.

Part of this interview focused on the question of _how do you make
interviewees comfortable?_ Comfortable enough to do the interview in the first
place, and comfortable enough to answer the questions openly, without fearing
that the interviewer is about to spring some trap on them.

I've also noticed you tend to apologize when asking someone a question you
think is tough, but it's interesting to see the reaction, almost a "No, no,
I'll answer it."

For questions that are particularly salient but awkward to ask, you should
continue to use that same technique to push just a bit further, both to
stretch your comfort zone, and to get a feel for the real boundaries of what
people are willing or even glad to answer.

