3 ms·
Honestly I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on that, depending on their actions, because I'm sure they sign so many documents they just rely on their
by tedivm 2y ago
Honestly I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on that, depending on their actions, because I'm sure they sign so many documents they just rely on their legal teams to ensure they're good.
- neglesaks 2y agoI'm not.
- Terr_ 2y agoHold up... Do you really think that a C-suite including career venture-capitalists who happen to be leading+owning stock in a private startup which has hit an estimated billion+ valuation are too naive/distracted to be involved in how that stock is used to retain employees? In other words, I'm pretty sure the Ed Dillingers are already in charge, not Walter Gibbs garage-tinkerers. [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atmQjQjoZCQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atmQjQjoZCQ
- acjohnson55 2y agoThere's absolutely no way that the officers of the company would be unaware of this. First of all, it beggars belief that this whole thing could be the work of HR people or lawyers or something, operating under their own initiative. The only way I could believe that is if they deliberately set up a firewall to let people be bad cops while giving the C-suite plausible deniability. Which is no excuse. But...you don't think they'd have heard about it from at least one departing employee, attempting to appeal the onerous terms of their separation to the highest authority in the company?
- callalex 2y agoThen why are they paid such obscene amounts of money?
- CRConrad 2y agoNaïve enough to deserve the downvotes. (None from me; too late.)