[throwawy11111]

Y'know, there is a third position where one can be in support of neither Benchmark nor Travis.

Benchmark obviously did not cause Susan Fowler, Waymo, Greyball or the rape-file. Travis deserved what he got or worse.

What Benchmark has done is continue to leak negative stories and internal data to gain leverage in boardroom spats. Without pointing fingers this is more or less acknowledged internally. And now they've instigated a very public lawsuit to drag everyone back through the muck. It completely undercuts the majority of thousands of employees who were not complict in any of the above and having been fighting desperately to right the ship.

If Benchmarks position is so righteous and self-evident why can't they just convince the other board members to remove him? No one's that strongly allied with Travis anymore. Ryan Graves and Garrett Camp both publicly declared theyre not voting him back in. There hasn't been a peep from Arianna in months. All the other directors are independent or external investors.

And btw the real fire from Benchmark didnt start until Travis rallied to have Bonderman, Benchmark ally, immediately step down after making mysognist comments at the Holder report all-hands. A role reversal which epitomizes the deeper truth here -- none of this is particularly about ethics; its about money, control and liquidity.

[evanweaver]

Bonderman off the board after one insulting comment. Travis not off after "Susan Fowler, Waymo, Greyball or the rape-file." There is no equivalency here.

But even if, implausibly, Benchmark is the messenger, shooting the messenger is still wrong.