While I don't agree with how Dan Porter came across on Twitter I think I can understand the frustration. You are having one of the best days of your life and then out of left field someone you know does an article that sideswipes it.
I read the Shay Pierce article when it was published and it was very respectful of his former employers...but it didn't have to happen now. Why did he write that article NOW? There is already a well deserved Anti Zynga sentiment and that article made his fellow employees look as if they were traitors to the forces of good. He admits that he has done work for Zynga in the past but then drops lines like "Not everyone shares my values, and not everyone is in a position to pick and choose job offers.". While true I can see how it can rub the people who choose to move forward with the Zynga acquisition the wrong way.
I don't agree how Dan Porter dealt with it, but I can understand being upset by that article being published right at this moment.
There is already a well deserved Anti Zynga sentiment and that article made his fellow employees look as if they were traitors to the forces of good.
How would holding off on the article change the contents? It wouldn't.
Timing matters, he struck while the iron was hot. There is no reason he should self-censor himself for the benefit of a company that looks like it's run by a bit of an ass.
I'm not talking about for the benefit of the company. I am talking about for the benefit of his fellow employees who took the deal. His article does not put them in the best light.
"that article made his fellow employees look as if they were traitors to the forces of good."
I didn't read that into it. The original piece by Pierce simply made the case that it's unethical for Zynga to gain ownership of a game he made and marketed completely in his own time, and since they were inflexible on that point, the decision was relatively straightforward for him. He then went on to criticize the design of Zynga's products, to explain how that made his decision even easier. The implication that other former coworkers are compromising their character by joining Zynga is never made by Pierce; it's your own interpretation.
I read the Shay Pierce article when it was published and it was very respectful of his former employers...but it didn't have to happen now. Why did he write that article NOW? There is already a well deserved Anti Zynga sentiment and that article made his fellow employees look as if they were traitors to the forces of good. He admits that he has done work for Zynga in the past but then drops lines like "Not everyone shares my values, and not everyone is in a position to pick and choose job offers.". While true I can see how it can rub the people who choose to move forward with the Zynga acquisition the wrong way.
I don't agree how Dan Porter dealt with it, but I can understand being upset by that article being published right at this moment.