Critical Thinking Critic

I’m a critical thinking critic… that means I don’t just report on feelings. I am discriminating. When applied correctly, discrimination is not a bad thing. Discrimination is fine when not based on bias, irrelevant details, or feelings.  For instance, I won’t hire, work with, or play with certain kinds of people. Not based on their religion, race, place of national origin, gender, sexual preference, physical appearance, diet and I’m sure a host of other details I’ve neglected. I don’t work with Assholes (okay, let me say, I’m the only asshole with whom I hang out).

I don’t hang with folks who are:

  • Liars
  • Cheaters
  • Fakers
  • Takers
  • Selfish
  • Indiscriminately Cruel

See that word up there, Indiscriminately? That’s an example of how lack of discrimination is a bad thing.

I’m a Critical Thinking Critic, which means I’m discriminating about the actions and people I critique.

Last week, I ended my 4 part opus on Evan Burfield which documented the behaviors he has exhibited that qualify him as an abhorrent human. Upon concluding that post, I requested new nominations for the next person to highlight in the Wolve’s of Startupland.   I then received the following anonymous email (name removed to protect the innocent).

From: Honey Badger
Date: Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 10:46 PM
Subject: Driven Forward Contact Submission from Honey Badger
To: glen

Nominate (Person’s Name Redacted)

To which I replied:

From: Glen Hellman
Date: Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 7:53 AM
Subject: (Person’s Name Redacted)
To: Honey Badger

And what would I report about him besides his name?

I know of nothing that qualifies as a wolf?


Yesterday I received this reply:

From: Honey Badger
Date: Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: (Person’s Name Redacted)

then you’re not thinking critically

Well as a guy who prides himself as a discriminating critical thinking critic this hurt my feelings and I’m a sensitive squishy kind of guy. So I said to myself, what would Donald Trump Do? And then instead of whipping out a childish, churlish tweet, I responded with a modicum of decorum.

From: Glen Hellman
Date: Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: (Person’s Name Redacted)
To: Honey Badger

It is difficult to think critically when there is a lack of supporting facts. So I will push back on your critique…

I may be naive, which means I lack the data.
I may lack the ability to think critically.
We just don’t know if I am unable to think critically when all the supporting facts I have in my possession, which includes, personal dealings, business quality and performance, and opinions of people who I trust, indicate (Person’s Name Redacted) is a good person.

I’m always open to supporting facts that will change my position.  Which is the trait of a critical

I use to respect many of the people I have ripped into on my blog, upon being presented supporting facts to change my opinion.

Do you have any facts you’d like to present?

Or do you lack the critical thinking capability to support your position?

By the way, thanks for the blog post!


As a Critical Thinking Critic, I welcome nominations to my Wolves of Startupland Series. Keep in mind this isn’t a witch hunt. Valid nominations should contain the following:

  1. Name of the nominated Wolf
  2. A Sender’s Name (While not mandatory, anonymous sources require a higher bar to be taken seriously. I do not reveal my sources unless they specifically allow it.)
  3. A verifiable list of transgressions, actions and/or facts that support Wolf-hood.

If all I get is a name, I won’t post it. I’ve received names and verifiable facts on some people who have done bad, but these people are now suffering… I don’t punch down. Also, there are some details I have about people like, Mr. Burfield that I just haven’t reported because it would hurt others. I reserve the right to decide if a person is a wolf, worthy of outing.