[melvinram]

Reading Dixon's post (not comments, just the post), I didn't get the sense that he was devaluing the work or sacrifices of early or even late stage employees who are going to give a lot of their "sweat & blood". From what I gathered, he was saying that the entrepreneurs are a different breed of people after the experience and that the joys and pains are different for them.

Let's get one part of the post out of the way first. The OP talks about missing family events for the company. Not wise, but understandable. I've taken similar decisions very early in my life and wouldn't do it again whether as a founder or employee. Not wise, but understandable. That aside, what the OP experienced as an early employee was likely the tip of the iceberg that the founders experienced on other instances.

The OP mentions not getting paychecks for some stretches. I applaud him for doing that but what he didn't experience was that 6 months prior, the founder probably took out a 2nd mortgage to keep up with everything and that they might be taking no salary or deferring it. What they didn't experience was the haunting thought of telling the employee that they might not be able to make payroll or worse, playing out the current situation 6-12 months out and seeing that you (the founder) might have to do the most painful part of your role and tell them that you can't afford to keep them.

I've know friends who've taken out that 2nd mortgage and truly given their all. When I started, I didn't own a home so I had the fortune of not having that option. However, I've had to do that last part the first year that I got in business. It hurts like hell even till today, 8 years later. The stress that you face, day in and day out... it's bad. Now I don't discount the work or the sacrifices that my initial employee made. He'll always have a brother in me and he has my greatest appreciation & respect. But it's just not the same.

I think that's what Dixon was saying. I'm curious though what prompted his train of thought.

[satishmreddy]

"You’ve either started a company or you haven’t. ”Started” doesn’t mean joining as an early employee, or investing or advising or helping out. ...... The important distinction is whether you risked everything, put your life on the line, made commitments to investors, employees, customers and friends, and tried – against all the forces in the world that try to keep new ideas down – to make something new."

That is what pissed me off. I was not a founder. I did not have a house and I was not going to take any more CC debt. But I put everything else I had on the line. And Chris is telling me that unless I founded a company everything I gave up meant nothing. Even founders draw the line some where right. After that second mortgage? Similarly I had my line drawn some where too but it was pretty deep.

[melvinram]

Not the same as being a founder is not == nothing.

Being an early stage employee takes guts, it's respected and often they are going play a ginormous role in the success or failure of the company.

But's not the same as being a founder. There is nothing to get bent out of shape about. It's just different.

Similar to how the President bares the ultimate responsibility and stress even though the brave soliders in the field and the generals that command them pay the ultimate price at times.

[satishmreddy]

Not getting bent out of shape. Just politely disagreeing with Chris. :)

I appreciate Chris a lot for the time he puts into his blog and I have acknowledged that numerous times in my comments on disqus.

But I disagree with him on this topic.