I work about 90 hours a week building software for local governments (http://seneca.systems http://seneca.systems). If I only cared about personal gain, I would

I work about 90 hours a week building software for local governments (http://seneca.systems http://seneca.systems). If I only cared about personal gain, I would have either a) stayed at Gusto (where the stock I left on the table is now worth ~$2m) or b) started an ad-network. You won't here about us in TechCrunch because what we do is not sexy or about our personal brands. I have never had so much fun as I do now, empowering public servants.[1] I agree he deserves a shot at redemption, but my point is that he doesn't seem to have gotten there yet. I'm not saying he is a bad person forever because of his original comments. Those do not really bother me—he fucked up, said some stupid things, and got vilified on the internet. But the why and how he goes about his future work absolutely matters to me because it indicates where he is going in the future. Let's say you're interviewing two candidates for a marketing position, both of whom have identical backgrounds, skills, etc. (impossible, but this is a hypothetical.) One says they want to do marketing for you because they love your customers, believe in your mission, and care about the impact they can have by spreading the word. The other one says they want to do marketing for you because they think you are attacking a huge market opportunity and can make a lot of money. Which do you hire? Would you say it doesn't matter because outcomes are the only important thing? I wouldn't, because part of trusting someone to act independently is understanding their motivations. If either of these candidates fuck up, they will do so in very different ways. Candidate 1 will err too much on the side of the customer and the mission, while Candidate 2 will err on the side of making money. I would take Candidate 1 11/10 times. [1]: Which, by the way, is probably irrelevant. You brought up good points regardless of who you are or what you do. Challenging the pedigree or credentials of the commentors only serves to distract. Unless I was making the point that I was better than him (which is not what I was trying to imply, so forgive me if it came off that way), then who I am is not relevant.