[johnnyanmac]

We just demontrated why it was a lie. Gaslighting the workers with "well you should have known he was a liar" does not absolve the liar of lying.

>and probably will even have targeted ongoing development.

well, 15 of them or so.

[x0x0]

You can't point out the place where they promised the workers jobs. Because there was no such commitment, either before or after the sale.

The company failed. In 4 years, they managed to turn the valuation from $8.5B to $1.4B. No employee should be in any way surprised by what happens when you watch your company's valuation fall that much. Anyone surprised by this wasn't paying any attention to the company's operating metrics (they only made $27m last year!) to a negligent extent.

It sucks for the people let go, but they can't be surprised.

[johnnyanmac]

you're arguing de facto with de jure. Not a historically healthy way to argue. We aren't lawyers here.

>Anyone surprised by this wasn't paying any attention to the company's operating metrics

Dude, I just want layoffs to be signaled ahead of time. You can defend billionaires all you want and gaslight engineers for not being marketing majors. My demands are very simple.

[x0x0]

Everyone saw 21: -50m, 22: -80m, 23: 21m, 24: 27m and knew this was a dead company walking. With one or more annual founds of layoffs since at least 2023. Oh, and low revenue growth and falling subscriber counts.

That's not marketing or gaslighting, that's expecting people to pay minimal attention to their employer's financial performance. Minimal here being on the level of possessing object permanence.