all because he randomly gave 6% to the COO so now he can’t veto lol I bet the same logic is how him and the CEO wound up with 50% to begin with I bet it was t

all because he randomly gave 6% to the COO so now he can’t veto lol I bet the same logic is how him and the CEO wound up with 50% to begin with I bet it was the CEO that originally suggested varying percentages which was probably more correct and is now acting on it. The reddit post said they fought/debated over that. I actually do find it offputting when founders are equal, it means they avoided/cant deal with confrontation or they have no idea how this sector works and just tried some out of touch pleb logic. So yeah he is playing by a totally inefficient set of rules and got screwed