And they found a way to try and paint you as a YC knock-off but still all publicity is good and I think this just reflects on TC's integrity. With the new site and momentum I'd seriously consider the benefits vs costs of rebranding (even using your current name as a subtitle? E.g. "CoolApp - The visual website optimizer", only because it might make PR coverage / funding easier later if that's what you want).
This TC comment by "Uhu" says it best though:
"
JUST another way to run a/b tests huh? A one-two person startup that has raked in some of the best names as their customer within months of launch with zero funding...is "just another" thing.
When you do finally give this kid some coverage, you frame it in the crappiest, most boring way possible
"
John Gruber once described Techcrunch as being in the dirty rotten business of VC funded startups. (I think it's the talk with Merlin Mann a couple of years back). Would love for all the connections between Techcrunch and the VCs to come tumbling out of the closet one day.
That's exactly my point. The word "just" is not in the title, nor the post.
I know that it's very easy to take a review personally, but based on your comments in this thread, your sense of entitlement about getting a writeup and then your criticism of said writeup are the two things I'm going to remember about VWO (which is unfortunate).
The VWO creator is the only one apart from yourself that is not criticising the writeup (except perhaps wishing they'd given it more depth as any creator would) - he seems in fact pretty glad to get it.
I understand the anger, believe me, but I do not understand a media relations strategy which seeks coverage from an outlet and then criticizes them for it. That isn't particularly fair that you have to be the soul of restraint in the face of shabby treatment, but journalism is a power and privilege game to begin with.
