Edit: come on guys, you're going to criticize the author for not having been a CEO? If you haven't been one either, what's the basis for the criticism? It makes no logical sense.

Edit 2: Regardless of whether the author is right or wrong, "You can't judge because you were never a CEO" is a silly comment to make. Maybe, the author is wrong, but in any case it's not because he's never been a CEO. Almost nobody has been a CEO. Does that mean they are immune from criticism by the rest of us? I just really felt the need to point out the sloppy thinking there. I'm clearly right about this. It seems as though pointing out obvious logical mistakes is now justification for downvotes and taking personal offence?