4 ms·

Justine Tunney wrote a post on her old blog arguing for founders' 'right to rule': https://web.archive.org/web/20151128145818/http://justinetunney.com/founders.

by dri_ft 6y ago

Justine Tunney wrote a post on her old blog arguing for founders' 'right to rule': https://web.archive.org/web/20151128145818/http://justinetunney.com/founders.html https://web.archive.org/web/20151128145818/http://justinetun... > I firmly believe that founders have a right to rule. This is because founders are the sorts of people who do not take power; they do not usurp power; and they do not inherit power. Instead, founders create their power from thin air where there was previously none. Founders are simply awesome people who make things happen; and as a result, they experience this phenomenon where power just materialises around them from the æther. It’s the truest and most noble form of power, and I feel it ought be embraced despotically.

ashtonkem 6y ago
Founders often have the legal right to authority in their companies, but advocating for “despotic” power is ... unsavory.
- elliekelly 6y ago
  Until the 80s the rule for public companies was “one share, one vote.”
  - dannyw 6y ago
    And that's how it should be.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
s_dev 6y ago
A founder is simply a role. It's not something that occupies part of your DNA. Founders do not have some monopoly on "making things happen". >This is because founders are the sorts of people who do not take power; they do not usurp power; and they do not inherit power. None of this is true. I'm sure we can all think of a good text book example that refutes each point made.
rsynnott 6y ago
> In 2014, Tunney petitioned the US government on We the People to hold a referendum asking for support to retire all government employees with full pensions, transfer administrative authority to the technology industry, and appoint Google chairman, Eric Schmidt as CEO of America. I mean, she just seems to be bonkers, really; I wouldn't pay too much attention. > "Hopefully, I'll live to see a day when all the muckraking progressive reporters/bloggers are sent to prisons" I wouldn't take any advice on basically anything from this person.
PragmaticPulp 6y ago
I think the Wikipedia article would make more sense if it was title "Founder Micromanagement Syndrome." The point isn't that founders need to be removed from their company. The point is that micromanagement doesn't scale in any system, and startups are no exception. At some point, founders need to learn how to delegate and build an org structure that scales. They can retain power, but they can't be micromanaging every decision of every team.

by dri_ft 6y ago

ashtonkem 6y ago

Founders often have the legal right to authority in their companies, but advocating for “despotic” power is ... unsavory.

elliekelly 6y ago
Until the 80s the rule for public companies was “one share, one vote.”
- dannyw 6y ago
  And that's how it should be.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

s_dev 6y ago

A founder is simply a role. It's not something that occupies part of your DNA. Founders do not have some monopoly on "making things happen". >This is because founders are the sorts of people who do not take power; they do not usurp power; and they do not inherit power. None of this is true. I'm sure we can all think of a good text book example that refutes each point made.

rsynnott 6y ago

> In 2014, Tunney petitioned the US government on We the People to hold a referendum asking for support to retire all government employees with full pensions, transfer administrative authority to the technology industry, and appoint Google chairman, Eric Schmidt as CEO of America. I mean, she just seems to be bonkers, really; I wouldn't pay too much attention. > "Hopefully, I'll live to see a day when all the muckraking progressive reporters/bloggers are sent to prisons" I wouldn't take any advice on basically anything from this person.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

I think the Wikipedia article would make more sense if it was title "Founder Micromanagement Syndrome." The point isn't that founders need to be removed from their company. The point is that micromanagement doesn't scale in any system, and startups are no exception. At some point, founders need to learn how to delegate and build an org structure that scales. They can retain power, but they can't be micromanaging every decision of every team.