This, to me, is good Internet civil discourse. Raw, unfettered, point v. Counterpoint.

See: http://pandawhale.com/convo/7026/researching-online-education-union-square-ventures-a-new-york-venture-capital-fund-focused-on-early-stage-amp-startup-investing?comment=24481

"If USV is any indication, there’s not a lot of research being conducted by investors into education and technology. (And again, this is a firm that is known for making smart tech investments, so make of that what you will). There’s a lot of interest. There’s a lot of deal flow. But if it’s based on TED Talks and articles in The New York Times and The Atlantic, then it’s a bit like the decisions made by the business folks who sit on the University of Virginia’s Board of Visitors, who read a David Brooks op-ed and fired the university president because they felt as though the school wasn’t jumping on the MOOC bandwagon with enough gusto. And we all know how well that turned out.

Of course, the decision-making process of the Board of Visitors wasn't done openly. We know about the thought-processes that went into firing Teresa Sullivan because emails were leaked, not because Google Docs were posted online.

So while the act of opening up the USV research is certainly a commendable one, there really isn't any substance to that research at all, and I find that incredibly troubling for the future of online education and ed-tech."