4 ms·

If you owned a business and you thought you owned 100% of it- and worked on it for 2 years how would you feel if someone shows up at the end saying they actaull

If you owned a business and you thought you owned 100% of it- and worked on it for 2 years how would you feel if someone shows up at the end saying they actaully are 50% owners. And they never said a word about it the entire 2.5 years you were working on it? You were marching along working your ass off thinking you owned X but someone else believed they owned half of X and didn't say anything? Isn't that a bigger deception? I think under US law there is a concept where if you don't speak up and it leads people to bad assumptions it can be problematic suing later.

gedrap 10y ago
>>> someone shows up Well, in this case, someone isn't some random dude from the Internet who you were never aware of. I understand your sentiment, but it doesn't apply in this case.
- jboydyhacker 10y ago
  He worked there a month and at no point after leaving made any claims to ownership despite an equity round and several years passing. If you pretend for 2.5 years you don't own something and others take action based on that belief, is that not a worse deception? Would Kyle or investors taken the same actions if they had known they held half the shares they did? There is dishonesty in staying silent.
  - gedrap 10y ago
    But, well, we can't assume that Kyle has totally forgotten about him, right? So he has quite a bit of responsibility for this as well. While Jeremy's timing gives him the most leverage possible (and it's definitely not the most honest thing to do), we can't just treat him as the villain, especially without knowing the full story.
    - jboydyhacker 10y ago
      Jeremy filed a counter claim which was his very well written side of the story. Officially that's what a counter claim is. Under the law if you knowingly allow people to proceed under false pretenses, it's harder to make a claim later. If it's true that Jermey never asserted the claim until now I think that's fairly damning - not just from an ethics standpoint but also legally. Also I never said Kyle has no responsibility here. You are putting words in my mouth. I'm sure Kyle feels terrible and it's a sickening claim and counterclaim to read frankly but I do think it's sneaky to wait until the last second and I do think legally there are consequences for doing that if it's true for Jeremy. Both sides have now told their stories in full and as well written as Jeremy's claim is- it's still a shakedown for cash for one months work. And a sneakily timed one at that.

gedrap 10y ago

>>> someone shows up Well, in this case, someone isn't some random dude from the Internet who you were never aware of. I understand your sentiment, but it doesn't apply in this case.

jboydyhacker 10y ago
He worked there a month and at no point after leaving made any claims to ownership despite an equity round and several years passing. If you pretend for 2.5 years you don't own something and others take action based on that belief, is that not a worse deception? Would Kyle or investors taken the same actions if they had known they held half the shares they did? There is dishonesty in staying silent.
- gedrap 10y ago
  But, well, we can't assume that Kyle has totally forgotten about him, right? So he has quite a bit of responsibility for this as well. While Jeremy's timing gives him the most leverage possible (and it's definitely not the most honest thing to do), we can't just treat him as the villain, especially without knowing the full story.
  - jboydyhacker 10y ago
    Jeremy filed a counter claim which was his very well written side of the story. Officially that's what a counter claim is. Under the law if you knowingly allow people to proceed under false pretenses, it's harder to make a claim later. If it's true that Jermey never asserted the claim until now I think that's fairly damning - not just from an ethics standpoint but also legally. Also I never said Kyle has no responsibility here. You are putting words in my mouth. I'm sure Kyle feels terrible and it's a sickening claim and counterclaim to read frankly but I do think it's sneaky to wait until the last second and I do think legally there are consequences for doing that if it's true for Jeremy. Both sides have now told their stories in full and as well written as Jeremy's claim is- it's still a shakedown for cash for one months work. And a sneakily timed one at that.