It indicates your attitude towards how one should act.
Obviously, one should act in their own self interest and use the law to it's fullest extent, not consider the social consequences of being a dick.
Good luck sir.
Obviously, one should act in their own self interest and use the law to it's fullest extent, not consider the social consequences of being a dick.
Good luck sir.
You seem to be certain one side is looking out for their self interest much more than the other, which you have no way of really knowing because you are just another person commenting on a discussion on the Internet.
Unless you are personally involved in this matter, and know more than what has been publicly reported so far? And even then, how would we know you are not being biased in your judgments by your involvement?
Ya'alls notion of "rights" is pretty disturbing to me.
Which is a coherent, defensible position. Sounded like you were selectively accusing one actor in this dispute as the "greedy" one, which I think is why you got so much push back on your comments.
If money is your goal great, more power to ya, but I'm gonna call you a dick and not want to work with you.
What do you need a reward for at all?
Why are you trying to build something?
By my standards, your motivation matters a lot, it sounds like you think people deserve rewards for doing things, I don't think that makes very much sense. Gold star you did the right thing, bullshit.
I'd want my cofounder to think through how somebody with legal leverage over our company would act. You should want that too.
That sounds like condoning exploitative behaviour to me. Is that the sentence we are both talking about?