3 ms·

I don't think any company here will tell you it'd be a deal breaker. Certainly it will have an impact though. You could testify but still have a plan for contro

by porter 12y ago

I don't think any company here will tell you it'd be a deal breaker. Certainly it will have an impact though. You could testify but still have a plan for controlling what comes up when people search your name. For example, by doing SEO on yourself. Also, if the law that was broken was actually a major thing then I'd be hard pressed not to testify. It might affect your career, but only with companies that themselves have questionable ethics. You probably don't want to work for them anyway.

flurp 12y ago
I agree with the advice above, and adding on to it, as a founder... If the case is morally and ethically sound then I wouldn't hold it against you, probably applaud you. On the contrary if it's a shakedown of sorts I would be questionable. As an exercise I would look into the recent lawsuit against VC firm Kleiner Perkins. Search the web for "kpbc lawsuit" and read how people have reacted to that case.
- smitherfield 12y ago
  I'd agree with this; if it's something along the lines of "executives were embezzling from the company," I'd consider it a sign of integrity. If it's "Uber isn't complying with taxi regulations!" then I wouldn't want to work with you.
  - tinco 12y ago
    "Uber isn't complying with taxi regulations!" -> "XXX isn't complying with YYY regulations!" -> "Apple isn't complying with workforce competition regulations!" So what you're saying is there's a certain level of integrity, and if someone goes over that level of integrity then they are too integer, and you don't want to work with them?
    - Andrew_Quentin 12y ago
      No. What he is saying is that there are some common sense good laws he agrees with and there are some outdated laws that no reasonable person would want to continue to uphold and need to be changed but our grandpas in congress have not gotten around to it yet.
pen2l 12y ago
> You could testify but still have a plan for controlling what comes up when people search your name. For example, by doing SEO on yourself. Hah. Easier said than done. :) But no, seriously OP, don't rely on this. Whitewashing one-self via attempted SEO is more likely to fail than not fail.

by porter 12y ago

flurp 12y ago

I agree with the advice above, and adding on to it, as a founder... If the case is morally and ethically sound then I wouldn't hold it against you, probably applaud you. On the contrary if it's a shakedown of sorts I would be questionable. As an exercise I would look into the recent lawsuit against VC firm Kleiner Perkins. Search the web for "kpbc lawsuit" and read how people have reacted to that case.

smitherfield 12y ago
I'd agree with this; if it's something along the lines of "executives were embezzling from the company," I'd consider it a sign of integrity. If it's "Uber isn't complying with taxi regulations!" then I wouldn't want to work with you.
- tinco 12y ago
  "Uber isn't complying with taxi regulations!" -> "XXX isn't complying with YYY regulations!" -> "Apple isn't complying with workforce competition regulations!" So what you're saying is there's a certain level of integrity, and if someone goes over that level of integrity then they are too integer, and you don't want to work with them?
  - Andrew_Quentin 12y ago
    No. What he is saying is that there are some common sense good laws he agrees with and there are some outdated laws that no reasonable person would want to continue to uphold and need to be changed but our grandpas in congress have not gotten around to it yet.

pen2l 12y ago

> You could testify but still have a plan for controlling what comes up when people search your name. For example, by doing SEO on yourself. Hah. Easier said than done. :) But no, seriously OP, don't rely on this. Whitewashing one-self via attempted SEO is more likely to fail than not fail.