> what is even the purpose of a board in a multi-class share structure with the founder holding above 50% voting shares.
This is a question about governance in general. The details of what happened at Automattic are irrelevant.
2,092 karma · joined March 31, 2011
x.y@z.com where x=kcl y=fcb z=gmail
> what is even the purpose of a board in a multi-class share structure with the founder holding above 50% voting shares.
This is a question about governance in general. The details of what happened at Automattic are irrelevant.
What's not normal is any kind of special investor right to sack the CEO unilaterally.
Founders are almost always outnumbered on the board by Series B, but like I speculated in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49638676, Automattic is unusual here, and Mullenweg may control it. There's still a decent chance that True Ventures left in protest rather than being booted, though, and has the right to a seat[1]. It's just, what's the point if Mullenweg has them beat 4-1?
1. Edit: The article confirms that Toni Schneider resigned, but not whether True Ventures (his firm) has the right to a seat.
>> You have to be quite unaware of your bubble if you think knowing about a niche Harry Potter fanfic is "standard" for people on the Internet.
> "niche"? It's literally one of the most read pieces of fanfiction of all time.
You jumped into a conversation about the ubiquity of something for people on the Internet. Either your claim is about that, in which case it's wrong, or it's not about that, in which case it's irrelevant.
This is very unlikely. True Ventures almost certainly controls at least one seat. (Until Phil Black left last year they actually held two seats, but that doesn't mean they had the right to. Either way, at the moment it's just Toni Schneider.)
In this case? Possibly! Ann Dunwoody and Sue Decker look like independents, and he might be able to unilaterally replace either or both of them.
So close to spotting the mistake you made in your response to skippyfish, yet so far!
you: > The cost of reading this story is not high
Do you see where you went wrong?
> We fuzz Bun's runtime APIs 24/7 using Fuzzilli, the JavaScript engine fuzzer used by V8 & JavaScriptCore
isn't wrong, even though that was only being done for the last 5-6 months of Zig Bun, and not the previous 5 years when they were accruing all of their tech debt.
pg_lake also uses DuckDB but keeps it external, routing through Postgres and managing Iceberg tables (but not the data itself) there (https://github.com/Snowflake-Labs/pg_lake).
Both of these were neck and neck with ClickHouse last time I tried them.
The teams no longer interacted after the acquisition, and in prior interactions the Bun team would've been correct in saying they weren't fuzzing.
So Jarred isn't wrong, and Andrew also isn't wrong.
There is a Yoda skill. -> A Yoda skill, there is.
Nope, don't do that. If you receive a credible term sheet at a meaningfully higher valuation, you'll have to rerun your 409A, even if you don't take the investment.
> I would stare longingly into the void, wondering if I can ever work another python project after having experienced uv, ruff, and ty.
You think you're disagreeing with me, but you're agreeing. To wit: The original post is silly, because ty is beta quality and Ruff isn't stable yet either. Your words.
These are just tools, Pylint included. Use them, don't use then, make them your whole personality to the point that you feel compelled to defend them when someone on the Internet points out their flaws. Whatever churns your butter.
It can be a rough gig.
Cyberstarts is the most blatant offender, but to be fair, VC has turned into the next rung on the career ladder for CIOs/CISOs, whose role is otherwise generally terminal (unlike e.g. COO or CMO). So a lot of deals get done now just on giving CISOs a path into VC. It's more subtle than Gili's way, and just as effective.