[np-]

> The CTO certainly seems not the most competent.

Viewed from another angle, the CTO successfully psychologically manipulated his team and almost literally beat a working, cheap solution out of them, and will almost certainly get full credit for this victory done on the backs of others. SO, was he truly not competent? Or was he extremely, dangerously competent?

Not only that, but while the CTO is busy counting his bonus money and accepting his new shares of equity from a satisfied performance condition, he managed to get the rest of the team to simply be proud of doing it for a pat on the back and the feeling of doing "live theater" or whatever.

[pnathan]

That is how I'd read it. I would actually say that OP got played, successfully.

[ryandrake]

Yep, the whole article was infuriating, yet I kept expecting a big windfall for the team in the end to justify it all, but instead we got:

  "But you also want to feel like a rock star when all your hard work hits real users for the first time and you feel that thrill of I did that. People like what I did. I overcame the impossible."

Y'all got rewarded with an attaboy and a 'rock star thrill' while the CTO probably blasts off in his career and collects his $millions. Well done!