blueben

If your execs prevent your employees from interacting with the board of directors, their only option is to go public to get the board and investors' attention. Brian only wants this to stay internal because he can control the narrative, how people communicate about it, and what the board and investors are made aware of.

Coinbase followed suit and Brian heavily praised DHH for it on Twitter.

"Please don't make this public, because then the investors will find out and they'll come after me."

Dutchie?

<meta name="author" content="VR and DnE">

Seems the authors forgot to give themselves the credit they deserve.

https://forums.darknedgy.net/profile.php?id=589 https://forums.darknedgy.net/profile.php?id=373 http://billyest.es/About_Me

Just curious. Does your legal agreement allow you to share details about a customer's technical implementation, support tickets, and billing history to Hacker News?

Brian, the only damage control you should be doing now is apologizing profusely to everyone for trying to manipulate this community. You spun a very sad story and left out incredibly crucial facts that did not serve you. That is simply unacceptable. This is clearly the act of a very immature person who is not ready for the world of business.

Your post is now clearly shameful; the fact that you went even further and began accepting donation money only escalates that shamefulness. Did you really think that the details you left out wouldn't come to light?

You've handled this very poorly. Apologize to the community, apologize to WhosHere before you get smacked with a defamation suit, and hire a damned lawyer to deal with your legitimate trademark and breach of contract lawsuit in a court of law instead of wasting time dancing around in the court of public opinion.

Ah, someone here doesn't like my opinion and thusly is downvoting every comment I've ever made. It's been quite a while since I was around HN, but I'm very disappointed. Is suggesting that perhaps letting a Judge decide these legal matters such a bad idea?

How about we let a court decide whether or not this is Trademark infringement instead.

I think that you decided to join the Internet Hate Machine before you knew all the facts, and now you're finding it difficult to admit to yourself that you were taken by a good story.

So we should believe what he says in public instead of what he says in private? Lets be honest here. He's lying. It doesn't matter which statement is a lie. That is a massive statement of his character.

Your friend appears to have lied by omitting key parts of the story. I'm wondering if he now has to worry about a defamation suit.

https://whoshere.zendesk.com/entries/21514943-the-other-side...

You might do well to wait for both sides of the story before lighting your pitchfork and calling to "rake these fuckers over the coals". Because looking at some of Brian Hamachek's emails to WhosHere, it appears you've been had by an untruthful sob story.

https://whoshere.zendesk.com/entries/21514943-the-other-side...

Crushing to whom? https://whoshere.zendesk.com/entries/21514943-the-other-side...

Reserving judgement was a good idea. https://whoshere.zendesk.com/entries/21514943-the-other-side...

Jesus, the Internet Hate Machine is brutal. You haven't heard the other side of the story and you already want to BOMB them?

The guy you're willing to BOMB other people for said to them, and I quote, "I was born wealthy; I have an obscene trust fund. I assure you that if required, I will obtain the best legal representation for corporate litigation in the Silicon Valley. After your last proposal, I will resist this legal action well beyond what makes any financial sense, simply out of principal."

Are you really sure you want to BOMB people to support him?

He also didn't mention that he tried to sell his app to them 2 years ago. Or that they made him an extremely generous offer this year.

I continue to be amazed that folks continue to claim a rich man with a published book who makes the rounds on cable news networks is somehow being "censored" by virtue of his mediocre talk not being highlighted by an independent foundation. Seriously, this does a serious disservice to the word censorship and people across the globe who suffer from actual censorship.

Non-sequitur.

A small correction. These are Google's customers. Facebook is the one trying to steal them away.

One humble suggestion? Perhaps we would finally save some money by cutting our gargantuan military costs spent defending the rich person's interests.

Warehoused? How do we prevent them from leaving the warehouse? Maybe we need some fences and armed guards.

And now that we've prevented them from leaving, how do we keep them from fighting and misbehaving? Maybe we put them all in separate rooms so they can't get at each other.

Congratulations, we've just created a prison and made it a de facto crime to be homeless.

So our choice is give the rich what they want, or they'll leave? Lacking a more compelling argument, I'll be the first at the airport to wave them off...

You aren't very familiar with the lifestyles of the modern rich. Their social circles are other rich people, not tied to a single location. This is the kind of wealth that can check in to any hotel at a moment's notice, and maintain any number of apartments internationally.

Don't downvote, it's a valid question that shoots at the heart of the entire philosophy.

Who needs principles when reality is so convenient?

Absolutely, more often than not.

Given that the government exists first to protect the interests of the people, and given that many of these carriers operate with government granted monopolies, I find it hard to shed any tears for these corporations.

Please remember, network neutrality isn't springing out of a vacuum. This net neutrality movement comes in response to real world events and corporate mergers.

Myself, and my circle of friends, use Groupon and none of us could be accurately described as "coupon chasers". Frankly, articles like this come off sounding angry, jealous, and ignorant.

You realize that your Gym, not Groupon, decided to issue too many coupons that resulted in the hypothetical crowding situation? That is your Gym's fault.