The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Jonathan Deutsch no published score: no usable exchanges on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
2exchanges match
0on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered produced feed D 5 · C 5 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.60

Q Okay, and where was your brain at that point? Was this like, uh, oh my god, I'm broke, I'm gonna be on the street if I don't make the company work, or you had plenty of money in savings, and it was a great time to risk starting your own thing.

A Um, I had been working at Apple for a bit and had saved up, um, a decent amount where I knew I wouldn't need to at least worry about the fundamentals for a while. Um, but of course, you don't want to be in the weeds too long, so pretty much after launching, we were able to get version one out Within about like six, seven months of release and see how that would do. And luckily at the time there weren't really the same tools for graphic designers, um, to do animated web content. And so it just kind of struck a nerve with people and, um, the launch went really well. And so that was able to see, oh, okay, this will be a successful business.

AI assessment note: “had saved up, um, a decent amount where I knew I wouldn't need to”

Answered produced feed D 4 · C 4 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.00

Q Okay, how do you, when they say, when he comes to you and says, Jonathan, I just, I really want to go back to Apple. I liked my cushy salary there. I liked the salmon lunches, and I liked the The problems that we was working on. How do you get him out of the company, but try and keep some of the equity?

A Uh, so we did have a discussion about that, and it really came down to the fact of, you know, if you're not going to be involved in the company anymore, and he, you know, at that point wanted to go back to Apple, it was a matter of, well, I think this equity belongs with the company, so we can use it for, excuse me, for, um, you know, paying employees in equity, for example, or doing other things with it, and You know, I think four years is a really good run in a company, but over the lifetime of what hopefully is a very long-lived company, um, the equity equation makes a little bit less sense at that. And I think most founders over the course of time want to sell their share and convert it to money as well.

AI assessment note: “it was a matter of, well, I think this equity belongs with the company”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 2,600 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.