zlacker

I read their comment a few times — I don't see where they said being "non-profit" makes you "wacky".

>>jerbea+(OP)
...what is it you thought they were saying? Because the "wacky structure" they refer to is the non-profit structure of the organization.

>>jerbea+(OP)
The comment definitely said that if your structure prevents from selling to the highest bidder your structure is whaky

>>jerbea+(OP)
apart from the things that my sibling comments are saying. OP just said

>so people put up with his foolishness.

about Ilya. OP just implied, having ideals == being foolish. it is as close to calling a non-profit, wacky.

>>rand84+S1
If you mean it prevents you from raising capital by selling a percent of the company then yes, that’s pretty wacky. Profitable companies can afford to be idealistic. Others that are burning billions don’t have that luxury.

>>jerbea+(OP)
HN has an edit function for the first hour.

It is an honour based system to clarify what you edited if it goes beyond typos/grammar.

Most probably GP used stronger words and then edited.

>>suriya+g3
It's especially ironic given that in this case, the idealists got their way.

>>jerbea+(OP)
May need to read it a few more times. Apart from the comment being written by someone who likes to identify themselves as “GreedClarifies”, it doesn’t take more than 4th grade reading comprehension to put two and two together.

- immediately calls their structure “strange” thanks to Ilya’s “idealism”.

- immediately calls him the “man” for his talents but a fool for what other than his ideals

- also labels Helen and Tasha (in quotes for some reason) as fools

- labels the board as “comically poor” for no other reason than they disagree with Sam’s supposed profit motive

Do we really need to draw a diagram here? It seems like you yourself may be out of your depth when it comes to reading comprehension.

>>DoingI+N5
Nope.

Good try though.