zlacker

>>etc-ho+(OP)
It's fascinating to me the extent to which executives don't consider themselves "public figures" when it comes to potential downsides, but they do in terms of upsides.

It feels so obvious to me that the CEO of such a high-profile org should at the very least quickly check public-facing social media posts against someone sensible, if not laundering them all through the experts at their org. But somehow they keep making these mistakes over and over again.

>>BobaFl+84
He said he was drunk when he posted the rant calling for slow death of most of the San Francisco city council, so of course he didn't send it to corporate PR to check. This kind of behavior shouldn't be acceptable for the head of a respectable corporation, even if his tweet hadn't led others to follow up with death threats. He should resign or be dismissed and YC should replace him with a responsible adult. This isn't a minor offense, it is grotesque. If he remains, it reflects very badly on YC.

>>not2b+Mg
Obviously, YC is not a "respectable organization", since they picked this fruitcake as their leader. This also explains why a portion of the readership of this site is so obviously unhinged.

>>shiroi+1G1
If you judge someone based on their worst day, you won't live a very happy life.

>>menset+qH1
People suffer consequences for their worst day all the time. Ordinary workers who engage in this kind of conduct usually get fired, often followed by police investigation, and they aren't judged for the days that they didn't bring their companies into disrepute by calling for the death of public officials. A CEO should be held to a higher standard, not a lower standard.