An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
1–10 of 59 posts
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#2[deleted]
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#3So, where's the blowback? I feel like half of the story is missing...
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#4Article doesn't really support the headline. The sole argument they provide that there was any "blowback" was that one time he brought it up in a job interview and didn't get a call back. Hardly enough to say your career prospects are some how wrecked because you exposed a blatant fraud.
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#5In all seriousness, isn't it best to secure your next position before going to the government or the investors? You have to assume that your job is over as you know it.
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#6So, where's the blowback? I feel like half of the story is missing...
From the article:
> Riordan is trying to start a company that improves email security. Partly, he says, that’s because blowing the whistle on Rothenberg dinged his career prospects. After once telling a job interviewer he was a whistleblower, he didn’t get a call back. Still, he says, the cost was worth it. “I knew that to some extent I would be damaging my career,” he says. “I was just so sure that it was the right thing to do.”
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#7Article doesn't really support the headline. The sole argument they provide that there was any "blowback" was that one time he brought it up in a job interview and didn't get a call back. Hardly enough to say your career prospects are some how wrecked because you exposed a blatant fraud.
It also says he was allegedly fired when the SEC cooperation was discovered.
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#8So, where's the blowback? I feel like half of the story is missing...
From the article: > Riordan is trying to start a company that improves email security. Partly, he says, that’s because blowing the whistle on Rothenberg dinged his career prospects. After once telling a job interviewer he was a whistleblower, he didn’t get a call back. Still, he says, the cost was worth it. “I knew that to some extent I would be damaging my career,” he says. “I was just so sure that it was the right…
Doesn't really explain how he knows the mention of being a whistleblower is the reason he wasn't called back.
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#9Article doesn't really support the headline. The sole argument they provide that there was any "blowback" was that one time he brought it up in a job interview and didn't get a call back. Hardly enough to say your career prospects are some how wrecked because you exposed a blatant fraud.
It also says he was allegedly fired when the SEC cooperation was discovered.
They are claiming he already gave notice he was leaving before then so they just accelerated the process.
Re: An employee who exposed Rothenberg Ventures to the SEC
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
It also says he was allegedly fired when the SEC cooperation was discovered.
They are claiming he already gave notice he was leaving before then so they just accelerated the process.
That's exactly what I would claim if someone accused me of unlawful termination.