Hacker News Reader

A vesting schedule is so crucial. Many founders find themselves in the position of being partners with someone who is all but inactive with a substantial portion of equity. Not only is it unfair to those doing the work but even if all parties are willing fixing the split later can be costly, time consuming, and have serious tax implications.

Vesting isn't perfect though. It treats all contributions the same and only really looks at the time it took to do some work.

The ideal situation seems to be that anyone doing work immediately vests ownership upon performing the work.

This is very hard to administer and will be a source of constant debates. From personal experience, such flexible system is not worth it.

Vesting with a two part criteria: a) be here the required time and b) do the required work. Protection for all parties, worked for me

This is so important. It keeps everyone motivated and aligned. If someone leaves, they keep what they've earned, but don't accrue additional ownership.

This is a great point I did in fact miss.

Granting stock (not options) with no vesting schedule is probably one of my biggest regrets.