4 ms·

Look at the total compensation numbers for everyone involved. They did Caroline dirty. Link: https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-million-do

Look at the total compensation numbers for everyone involved. They did Caroline dirty. Link: https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-million-dollars-alameda-2023-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-mill...

SnorkelTan 3y ago
Do you have a link for this? I haven't followed the trial closely.
- hooverd 3y ago
  Updated my parent comment. 6 million to SBFs 2.2 billion.
reaperman 3y ago
> Look at the total compensation numbers for everyone involved. I looked again but I don't see these in the article.
- hooverd 3y ago
  It's not in the article. https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-million-dollars-alameda-2023-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-mill...
stevenwoo 3y ago
It seems undeniable they were stealing from people and she knew and was part of the operation. She is likely going to get a minimal sentence by cooperating with the prosecution. The only ethical person in the room resigned as soon as he realized what FTX and Alameda were doing according to his testimony in court today. SBF managing to give his girlfriend much less compensation in stolen money than his father seems like a minor lapse compared to all the other actual criminal acts going on here.
- wly_cdgr 3y ago
  Hmm, no, giving her significantly lower compensation would be highly criminal and bad if it was the case that it was because of her gender
  - pea 3y ago
    Out of interest, if the above were proved to be true, could she theoretically bring a gender discrimination case -- even if the whole thing is a massive fraud which she was complicit to?
  - dchftcs 3y ago
    I don't think it's due to gender per se (not that this necessarily matters to the trial). More likely SBF just found her to be the easiest to exploit. There's certainly a correlation (a dude would have slightly different reasons to allow himself to be exploited), but my priors are that gender isn't the direct cause here.
    - catchnear4321 3y ago
      so it wasn’t because of her gender. but she was easy to exploit, unlike the boys. (the woman was easiest to exploit, coincidentally.) she was also “his girlfriend” for a time. sbf likes easy targets with low risk of blowback. moves like a particular type of abusive personality. the little boy who can’t be held accountable. and now she’s testifying against him. that’s not even getting into systemic gender bias, but that might not jive with your perception of dudes’ motivations.
dchftcs 3y ago
Sam Trabucco joined later but made much more. It's strange that she would take such a risk for a meagre 6 million, and presumably knowing about Alameda's finances and profitability. Maybe she was not that into money and had other motivations...
- killingtime74 3y ago
  Or just bad at negotiating
- boppo1 3y ago
  She seems less... aware. There's a video out there where she answers a question about their use of math that makes it seem like she was more of a figurehead who was in over her head rubber stamping all sorts of stuff that made her uncomfortable, but doing it anyway because 'it's working'.

SnorkelTan 3y ago

Do you have a link for this? I haven't followed the trial closely.

hooverd 3y ago
Updated my parent comment. 6 million to SBFs 2.2 billion.

reaperman 3y ago

> Look at the total compensation numbers for everyone involved. I looked again but I don't see these in the article.

hooverd 3y ago
It's not in the article. https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-million-dollars-alameda-2023-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/caroline-ellison-paid-6-mill...

stevenwoo 3y ago

It seems undeniable they were stealing from people and she knew and was part of the operation. She is likely going to get a minimal sentence by cooperating with the prosecution. The only ethical person in the room resigned as soon as he realized what FTX and Alameda were doing according to his testimony in court today. SBF managing to give his girlfriend much less compensation in stolen money than his father seems like a minor lapse compared to all the other actual criminal acts going on here.

wly_cdgr 3y ago
Hmm, no, giving her significantly lower compensation would be highly criminal and bad if it was the case that it was because of her gender
- pea 3y ago
  Out of interest, if the above were proved to be true, could she theoretically bring a gender discrimination case -- even if the whole thing is a massive fraud which she was complicit to?
- dchftcs 3y ago
  I don't think it's due to gender per se (not that this necessarily matters to the trial). More likely SBF just found her to be the easiest to exploit. There's certainly a correlation (a dude would have slightly different reasons to allow himself to be exploited), but my priors are that gender isn't the direct cause here.
  - catchnear4321 3y ago
    so it wasn’t because of her gender. but she was easy to exploit, unlike the boys. (the woman was easiest to exploit, coincidentally.) she was also “his girlfriend” for a time. sbf likes easy targets with low risk of blowback. moves like a particular type of abusive personality. the little boy who can’t be held accountable. and now she’s testifying against him. that’s not even getting into systemic gender bias, but that might not jive with your perception of dudes’ motivations.

dchftcs 3y ago

Sam Trabucco joined later but made much more. It's strange that she would take such a risk for a meagre 6 million, and presumably knowing about Alameda's finances and profitability. Maybe she was not that into money and had other motivations...

killingtime74 3y ago
Or just bad at negotiating
boppo1 3y ago
She seems less... aware. There's a video out there where she answers a question about their use of math that makes it seem like she was more of a figurehead who was in over her head rubber stamping all sorts of stuff that made her uncomfortable, but doing it anyway because 'it's working'.