2 ms·
"The implication is that he may have lost an argument with his boss re: the odds of going to jail if that memo was published, and decided to flee the scene of t
by cwp 15y ago
"The implication is that he may have lost an argument with his boss re: the odds of going to jail if that memo was published, and decided to flee the scene of the crime before it went down."
Why so uncharitable? Resigning, rather than participating in something they believe is wrong, is exactly what people with integrity do. Do we have any reason to believe that the argument wasn't about, say, whether sending the memo violates the spirit of the quiet period? Whether current and future investors would be best-served by the memo becoming public? How to spell "revenue"?
- tptacek 15y agoIt's also the case that at the highest levels of executive decision making, being on the losing side of a major strategic decision often leads to resigning. If you own PR, and the entire PR strategy is overridden by the CEO, you might leave simply because it becomes clear that you can't e effective in that company; the CEO has usurped your role. That's not a value judgement or anything; it's just life in the big city.
- mechanical_fish 15y agoI agree. And the article doesn't suggest that the guy who resigned did anything against the rules; quite the contrary. And, having drunk some more coffee since this morning, I am now sorry that I tried to summarize the article at all. I fear I may have thereby carried water for poorly-sourced rumors that, for all I know, have no basis in fact. I would edit or delete my original comment if I could, but I no longer have the power to do so. I apologize and I promise to try to ignore the Silicon Valley rumor mill even more aggressively in the future.