[Obscurity4340]

> I’ve hired people that were involved in palace coups at unicorn startups, twice...I know for sure that I would never, ever hire someone who I felt confident might go down that route.

So you hired coupers but you would never hire...coupers? Did you not know about their coups cuz that's the only way I can see that makes sense here. Could you clarify this, seems contradictory...

Also, great quote about startup failure :)

[adastra22]

These people were early hires at a company I co-founded (but was not in an official leadership role at). They had never pulled a coup before, but they would do so within two years of being hired. The coup didn’t affect me directly, and indeed happened when I was out of the country and was presented as a fait accompli. But nevertheless I left not long thereafter as the company had already begun its downward slide.

The point in my comment was this: in retrospect, I’m not sure there’s anything that would have tipped me off to that behavior at the time of interview. But if this was something I could somehow identify, it would absolute be my #1 red flag for future hires.

Edit: The “twice” part might have made my comment ambiguous. What I meant was after I hired them, these people went on to pull two separate, successive coups, which indicates to me the first time wasn’t an aberration.

[Obscurity4340]

You should have made them fake manager like Michael Scott appointed Dwigt Schrute

[Obscurity4340]

'S all good

[coldacid]

>So you hired coupers but you would never hire...coupers? Did you not know about their coups cuz that's the only way I can see that makes sense here. Could you clarify this, seems contradictory...

You might have missed this from GP's comment:

>>I’m not sure I can identify exactly who is liable to start a coup

In other words, at least once these people have pulled the wool over their eyes during the hiring process.

[Obscurity4340]

Thats what I thought ;)