and to add - your hypothesis that Mike wants to get fired doesn't match any real analysis of the situation. You seem to have said this only to only re-open you

and to add - your hypothesis that Mike wants to get fired doesn't match any real analysis of the situation. You seem to have said this only to only re-open your old claims again, but if you read your supporting evidence, it doesn't backup your claim that Mike wants to get fired. Now I know absolutely nothing of what is going on - but here is some quick analysis. First - there is no way in the world that MG wrote this post on Techcrunch without Mike knowing about it. If I were a bettering man, I would wager that Mike prompted it. The evidence? Every time MG writes a 'meta' post about Techcrunch, blogs, politics etc. he writes it on his personal blog. He has never meta-blogged on Techcrunch. Only yesterday he wrote a post on his personal blog about this situation. Second - Mike said in the press last week that he will still write at Techcrunch. Because he wants to - because he has to. And remember the fund was announced without Mike stepping down. The 'stepping down' part came only a few hours later when AOL were forced into the move under some media pressure and scrutiny. Queue screwing up the press announcement about the fund, AOL going back on their statements and then finally telling the press that Mike no longer works there (without Mike saying anything) and suddenly you have a post, on TC, from MG, that reeks of a last-ditched move orchestrated by Mike This is all about using a public reaction to get Mike's job back at Techcrunch, and everything back to how it was a week ago. If you spent the amount of time you did on your comment looking at the actual situation without blinders on you would realize that the real conclusions and any real analysis is the opposite of what you suggest (ie. it has nothing to do with CA residency tax codes)