[colinsidoti]

To me, the Kapor's are effectively claiming Uber has breached their trust.

They also indicate they have been a "team player" during prior incidents: "As early investors in Uber, starting in 2010, we have tried for years to work behind the scenes to exert a constructive influence on company culture. When Uber has come under public criticism, we have been available to make suggestions, and have been publicly supportive, in the hope that the leadership would take the necessary steps to make the changes needed to bring about real change."

So it's hard for me to fault them here.

For the sake of more thought provocation, what do you think about YC's "Founder Ethics" rules, and how would you want YC to respond if Uber were a YC company? http://www.ycombinator.com/ethics/

[kogir]

One notable difference with YC is that when they cut ties for ethical reasons, they do it privately, and dispose of their ownership.

It's a particularly principled stance.

[andrewprock]

It's not obvious that quietly separating is the principled stance when dealing with ethical issues.

[oxryly1]

Do you know of an example of that?

[brudgers]

If he knew, sharing such information would probably not be consistent with the practice.

[argonaut]

If you can't think/find an example of this happening, that would confirm the assertion that YC does this quietly and privately.

[oxryly1]

Or not at all.

[rdl]

My only problem with the YC rules are that some of them are pretty open to interpretation, although I trust the people making the judgment to be both competent and fair. (the standard catch-all "Generally behaving in a professional and upstanding way.", etc.)