51–60 of 115 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> I wish we could ban most of the top active commenters on hacker news. Assuming I'm on it, let's see the rest of your list of HN'ers you'd like to see banned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the Businessweek link, Brown seemed to contribute an idea. And that's it. Nothing unique (disappearing photo apps existed before, see the rest of the thread). No programming expertise, he didn't make anything.
read their statement carefully: “We acknowledge Reggie’s contribution to the creation of Snapchat and appreciate his work in getting the application off the ground.” I wouldn't think they'd add a sentence like this to their press release if his only contribution was only an idea.
That's exactly the sort of thing that was likely specified in the settlement agreement itself, probably in exchange for a lower financial cost of settling.
I was going to link to the mandatory reading of Joel Spolsky's canonical answer on splitting shares in startups between founders and beyond. But as Stack Exchange's policy of shuttering less popular subsites that is now lost in its original form :( It was originally here http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-s... Is there a good reproduction elsewhere?
I was going to link to the mandatory reading of Joel Spolsky's canonical answer on splitting shares in startups between founders and beyond. But as Stack Exchange's policy of shuttering less popular subsites that is now lost in its original form :( It was originally here http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-s... Is there a good reproduction elsewhere?
Found it copied here: http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair-method-... """ This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world’s most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer. The most important principle: Fairness, and th…
Honestly, I don't see either of these as nothing but positive news (for the companies, not necessarily for all the people involved).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how such things become possible. As co-founders shouldn't you have a written (and lawyer checked) agreement on how the company is shared amongst you? How can one betray the other besides of letting him/her unknowingly sign an unfortunate contract?
Projects like that are usually made between friends and aren't really expected to become THAT big. Plus, it doesn't really matter, they took the guy out of the business and took away his rightful part of it. Good thing they settled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> I wish we could ban most of the top active commenters on hacker news. Assuming I'm on it, let's see the rest of your list of HN'ers you'd like to see banned.
Only because I disagree with his views on everything (besides crypto).
Just kidding. If it weren't for the tptaceks of internet, I'd have no reason to ever leave a comment.
I was going to link to the mandatory reading of Joel Spolsky's canonical answer on splitting shares in startups between founders and beyond. But as Stack Exchange's policy of shuttering less popular subsites that is now lost in its original form :( It was originally here http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-s... Is there a good reproduction elsewhere?
..they killed the site because of .1 answer per day?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wish we could ban most of the top active commenters on hacker news. Assuming I'm on it, let's see the rest of your list of HN'ers you'd like to see banned.
tptacek Only because I disagree with his views on everything (besides crypto). Just kidding. If it weren't for the tptaceks of internet, I'd have no reason to ever leave a comment.
I would not even want to see people banned for asking other people to be banned. It's just totally against the grain of the community. I read back some more through 'compare's' comments and he did indeed have a run-in with Thomas so you may be on to something there.
I was going to link to the mandatory reading of Joel Spolsky's canonical answer on splitting shares in startups between founders and beyond. But as Stack Exchange's policy of shuttering less popular subsites that is now lost in its original form :( It was originally here http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-s... Is there a good reproduction elsewhere?
Found it copied here: http://www.gravitycomputing.co.nz/joels-totally-fair-method-... """ This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world’s most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer. The most important principle: Fairness, and th…
If you're ever in a situation where the entire remainder of the company, investors included, are wanting the company to go in a completely different direction then I would have to agree that something is terribly wrong. Maybe 50% is enough. Maybe I'm bringing up a hypothetical that has no basis in reality.