My comment was not scientific, but it served to counter-balance the lack of hypothesis from the other comments at the time, where basically nobody read more int

My comment was not scientific, but it served to counter-balance the lack of hypothesis from the other comments at the time, where basically nobody read more into it and the consensus was "oh well, shit happens". Sure, it's from my personal bias / experience - but all I was saying is that nobody pointed out that there's a strong likelihood / probability that <hypothesis> the girl had some issues </hypothesis> - which could <hypothesis> be independent of the whole startup drama </hypothesis> to begin with. So "girl ran of with my co-founder" without any analysis on the girl herself, only serves to sensationalize the startup drama more, as opposed to asking "did the drama have anything to do with girl running off with co-founder, or vice versa" And my tangential point to the post about the startup drama is, aside from watching out for the co-founder dynamics gotchas / pot holes, watch out for girls with issues. Hypothetically, what I'm also saying is, if you were the other co-founder (the one that "got the girl"), don't be too quick to think you've won everything (meaning, you may not want that girl). The statement that you just read is also a hypothesis, just in case. http://blog.daryn.net/post/32264049/paul-buchheit-limited-life-experience http://blog.daryn.net/post/32264049/paul-buchheit-limited-li... I can't edit the comment I originally posted - by I now wish I started it with, "anybody who's been burned like this before knows exactly what I'm talking about. If you haven't, feel free to pooh pooh my comment and disregard - I apologize for wasting your time." p.s. the remark I made about this being a pattern can be argued that it's not just a personal bias - if there's anyone who's familiar with family therapy / psychiatry here - you'll know what I'm talking about.