Hacker News Reader

Comment by hcarvalhoalves | Hacker News Reader

Sounds like Dave enjoyed having the entire company as hostage. Pretty good for getting paid I guess but not someone I would want to work with.

View on HN

If you fail to pay your employees and not even have any urgency in fixing it (if "it'll be in your next paycheck" is an accurate quote), it's only fair if employees don't have any urgency in helping you. If my employer fails to pay on time, I expect that to be their top priority everyone involved goes crazy about.

Sounds like the company didn't pay Dave, so why should Dave do work for the company?

Sounds like a fantastic businessman. My CEO is always talking about how to corner the market and (without disclosing what we do) make it so some industries have to use our product if they want regulatory approval.

Think like your masters.

Don't hate the player...Game on!

I suspect that Dave's pay was not proportionate to his skills

I suspect that Dave doesn't actually exist.

Stories this well-calibrated to make a specific point I think are generally fabricated from whole cloth.

As the author I probably can't change your mind without revealing his real identity, but i'm glad you thought the writing was well calibrated :) so thanks I guess?

OR - tech skills are only part of the salary you get. Another is being able to work well with a team. If Dave wasn't being paid proportionately, why didn't he just get another job? Maybe, just maybe, he SUCKED at working well in teams. Which means - the free market placed him in a niche position where the team tolerated his idiosyncrasies for good tech skills, and his salary reflected that

I suspect that Dave's pay was not proportionate to his value to the company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com