There's an old argument among entrepreneurs and investors about whether (and how long) new startups should stay in "stealth mode", keeping secret the details (or even existence) of their venture. Jeremy Liew covered the pros and cons in February at the Lightspeed Venture Partners blog. Two years ago, respected entrepreneur Mark Fletcher blogged that Stealth Start-Ups Suck. Entrepreneur-friendly VC Paul Kedrosky disagreed.

Charlie O'Donnell and Alex Lines have chosen anti-stealth for Path 101:

From the very start of our business, we are going to do things differently.  We are going to build in an open, transparent way.  We're going to tell the world what we're up to, how we're doing it, and solicit feedback on how we can do better from every stakeholder.

Why?

Because we believe that will make us more successful.

(Hat tip: Fred Wilson, A VC, Liveblogging A Startup ... who is O'Donnell's former boss at Union Square Ventures, and a soon-to-be angel investor in Path 101.)

The story so far:

The LinkedIn post reads like an "open letter" to the business development folks:

We have a lot of ideas about how we would see working with LinkedIn that we'd like to share, but there doesn't seem to be a working group of potential partners, so we'll just post them here.  Here are the top 10 ways that we see Path 101 working with LinkedIn.

One potential problem with transparency, others can read between the lines:

Now, what strikes me about the post is how clear it is that Charlie as already reached out to LinkedIn, and that his calls have not been returned.
...
While drawing public attention to this snubbing could backfire, I bet it serves to get the right person at LinkedIn to return the call and form a partnership. And if this works, look for a lot more startups to go anti-stealth.

Another: some blogger may point out that there are only 7 not the promised 10:

Typo, or not, NOT off to a good start

(Hat tip: Techmeme whose grouping isn't perfect, so check out the links to A VC too.)