Jamie Zawinski

I second al3x and add what I said last time:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=170750

Bill Wyman, who has never written a word that rang false to me, said it better than either of us back in '99:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/11/03/sf/index.html

Alex sees an upside to SF that I don't. Apparently you can DJ at a club in San Francisco. But your favorite band skips San Francisco, because there are so few venues to play at. I could opine about that, but JWZ said it better than I did:

http://www.dnalounge.com/donate/

(San Francisco was a crappy place to see music back when bands were playing the Maritime Hall, lest you think I'm being opportunistic here).

There are some excellent restaurants in San Francisco. Unfortunately for SF, NYC, DC, Boston, Chicago, and Seattle can all go toe-to-toe with it. SF gives you Michael Mina, NYC gives you Per Se, and throws in The Spotted Pig. For such a small city, SF throws down admirably, but it is simply outgunned by the big cities.

Of course, this is all a moot point, since you're probably not going to live in San Francisco if you move to the bay area. You are probably going to live somewhere in the South Bay, and the South Bay is an unforgiveable suburban wasteland.

Alex is one kind of person for whom San Francisco isn't ideal. I was him 10 years ago. Now I'm a different kind of person for whom San Francisco doesn't work: someone who wants to live in an actual neighborhood. There are 6 other young families with kids on…

From https://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2016/12/19.html (copy and paste link into address bar):

> I know that with this level of transparency and vulnerability I'm setting myself up for a bunch of wisecracks from people who are all too eager to tell me what I did wrong and how they totally would have done it differently, having created nothing of lasting value themselves. How this situation [could have been avoided] or that was "obvious" [that it would happen]. Haters gonna hate, I know how it goes.

I really hope this will work out for the proprietor. They're asking for $110,000 recurring donation per month to meet monthly payroll, San Fransisco rent, utilities and unpaid bills (without offering a tangible reward).

While that amount of money ($1.32 million annually) arguably could be better spent on more worthy causes, it will be incredible if the recurring donation business model turns out to successfully fund relatively niche content of this magnitude.

Yelp is implying a supportive relationship that does not exist.

Quite the contrary - jwz does not want his business listed on Yelp. He does not like Yelp, and his blog describes some of the issues.

(Eg, Yelp requires/d "a photo in which your whole face can be seen" while DNA Lounge wanted to use "our logo as the image" - quotes from jwz's blog.)

How would you like me telling everyone that "I'm frank_nitti's best friend", and (honestly) raising money for you, when you don't want me in your life?

wk_end comments about it being "free money".

DNA Lounge already has a Patreon page at https://www.patreon.com/dnalounge and a one-time donation page at https://www.dnalounge.com/donate/ .

What happens if an alternative GoFundMe site, auto-generated by Yelp, results in a reduction of the overall donation stream? Then it wouldn't be "free money", would it?

So, who decides if this plan is appropriate for the business?

Hint: not Yelp.

You're probably thinking of jwz, and you're probably thinking of this blogpost:

https://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2006/04/

> For years I've had it drummed into my head that you always have to keep your systems patched, if you aren't running the latest security fixes, the script kiddies will eat you alive, running a six month old OS is like leaving your front door wide open, blah blah blah. Well you know what? Fuck that noise. I'm done upgrading anything ever. The next time I get this shit into a state that seems even remotely stable, I'm never touching it again. If we get hacked, oh well. I have backups. It has got to be less work to recover from than constantly dealing with this kind of nonsense.

Or possibly this CodingHorror blog entry that summarizes a few other instances of jwz saying this:

https://blog.codinghorror.com/let-that-be-a-lesson-to-you-son-never-upgrade/

From the OP's quoting of Facebook:

>"Your ad content violates Facebook Ad Guidelines. Ads are not allowed to promote the sale or use of adult products or services, including toys, videos, publications, live shows or sexual enhancement products."

From DNA Lounge's page, http://www.dnalounge.com/calendar/2015/04-10.html:

>"From the dawn of humanity, to Ancient Egypt, to the glory that was Rome; everybody loves a burlesque show! Join San Francisco's world-famous Hubba Hubba Revue for an epic night of tassels & tease, thousands of years in the making!"

It's an adult live show, a burlesque. Facebook policy rules it out and it's very cut-and-dried.

The only reason this appears to be here is an attempt at viral marketing.

13+ social media site won't advertise 18+ (or 21+ presumably if it's USA based on drinking laws) live show for adults with softcore sexual content.

Flagged.

Reagan halted antitrust enforcement and nobody fixed it, so they were allowed to own controlling stakes in several industries and freeze out competitors. They get exclusives with bands, agencies, venues, and promotions so at each point anyone who tries to do something else runs into a package they can’t compete with: a band which doesn’t play ball won’t get the big venues, a venue which acts independently won’t get the big acts, etc. It’s clearly abusive but they managed to spread enough money around to avoid action before Biden, and then Trump overturned that because he has the same mentality.

jwz has been writing about this for years. I don’t remember if he’s playing games with the HN referrer header on dnalounge.com but you probably want to use https://tinyurl.com/yskf7ypz instead of https://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2018/01/31.html.