I can't help to think he tainted his prospects quite a bit with this debacle. I don't see it as a major mark against him. First, it's unclear that he, himself,

I can't help to think he tainted his prospects quite a bit with this debacle. I don't see it as a major mark against him. First, it's unclear that he, himself, tried to create the lie. Second, social proof arbitrage (which we both know isn't a real "arbitrage" but the hacking of peoples' reference-counting algorithms in order to establish personal credibility) is something that everyone does, especially in Silicon Valley where it's just a necessary social skill. It's just a bit juvenile to attach it to a rather verifiable claim of having made $72 million. The best social proof arbitrage is when you dishonestly represent the opinions of influential or reputable people, rather than creating false facts (that will eventually be refuted).