I didn't understand the very last part:

> Another good contingency measure is for only the CEO to hold a board seat before a significant equity fundraise. That will prevent board disputes during tough decisions, such as in the unlikely event that the CEO has to fire a co-founder.

Can someone please unfurl what this means? Is it arguing for the founders NOT to have a board seat before significant equity changes so that the CEO can be the arbiter betwen them? (Btw, it's odd to assume the CEO is not a founder).