

3 Serial founders share their 'Success Hacks' - ulfstein
http://www.foundread.com/view/3-serial-founders

======
mxh
A bit o/t, but I hereby nominate 'serial', as applied to 'entrepreneur' and/or
'founder', as the most pointless, irritating, and obnoxious word of 2007.

You don't describe someone who works a bunch of jobs as a 'serial employee'.
You don't describe an athlete who competes in successive Olympics as a 'serial
Olympian'. Etc.

This 'serial' business is nothing more than noise and puffery. 'Entrepreneur'
tells me something, though not much. 'Successful entrepreneur' tells me a
tiny, tiny bit more. 'Serial entrepreneur' tells me someone is a self-
promoting git.

I even saw this term applied to PG in an article some weeks ago. Considering
that PG has repeatedly written that a startup is kinda stressful, and
something he'd be very reluctant to do again, I think that marked the time the
term slipped into complete meaninglessness for me. (Note that PG didn't refer
to himself that way, 'twas the idiot writer/reporter.)

Let's drop the adjective, and shun those who use it.

/rant

~~~
aston
The adjective's fine. It's supposed to be used in the same sense you'd use
"serial killer" or "serial drinker," as in, someone who continually engages in
some vice. It's a bit tongue-in-cheek, since there's really nothing wrong with
starting companies, which makes it even more enjoyable to use.

I do oppose its misuse, however. PG's clearly not one, having only done one
startup. These guys actually are, though.

------
yters
Hack hack hack? Hackity hacka hack. Hack hack hack!

