[mijoharas]

How has the board shown that they fired Sam Altman due to "responsible governance".

They haven't really said anything about why it was, and according to business insider[0] (the only reporting that I've seen that says anything concrete) the reasons given were:

> One explanation was that Altman was said to have given two people at OpenAI the same project.

> The other was that Altman was said to have given two board members different opinions about a member of personnel.

Firing the CEO of a company and only being able to articulate two (in my opinion) weak examples of why, and causing >95% of your employees to say they will quit unless you resign does not seem responsible.

If they can articulate reasons why it was necessary, sure, but we haven't seen that yet.

[0] https://www.businessinsider.com/openais-employees-given-expl...

[ethanbond]

Good lord: it’s a private company. As a general matter of course it’s inadvisable to comment on specifics of why someone is fired. The lack of a thing that pretty much never happens anyway (public comment) is just harmful to your soap opera, not to the potential legitimacy of the action.

[mijoharas]

According to reports they haven't told executives and employees inside the company. (I'm not arguing that they should speak publicly, though given the position the board put itself in I think hiring PR people for external crisis comms is very much warranted)

When 95% of your staff threatens to resign and says "you have made a mistake", that's when it's time to say "no, the very good reasons we did it are this". That didn't happen.

[dangerface]

Its not a private company it is a non profit working in the public interest this usually requires some sort of public accountability. The board want to be a public good when they make decisions but want to be a private entity when those decisions are criticised by the public.