[tatsuke95]

>"Mark Pincus and Andrew Mason are both still running these companies."

Because, at least in Pincus' case, he can't be removed. It would be pretty hard to argue that he wouldn't have been canned under different circumstances.

"Pump and dump" may be a bit much. But I'm glad that it's coming to light that business shadiness doesn't start and stop with the financial industry; it occurs everywhere there are substantial amounts of money changing hands. The Valley has some pretty serious scum-baggery going on. I hope we hold the people who promoted this stuff accountable in the court of public opinion.

[drumdance]

Yes, but he can cash in and quit. Why hasn't he? I've never run a public company but I know some who did during the first dot-com crash and it was not pleasant.

[ahi]

It's not easy to liquidate a majority stake in a large public company into cash. At least, not quickly.

[rms]

Because that signal might destroy the company?

[drumdance]

So what? If he's the sociopath everyone makes him out to be, who already has more money than God, what's the big deal?

My point is that "good vs. evil" style commentary is useless. It automatically lowers the commenters' mean IQ by 15 points.

This, of course, is the reason discussing politics (as opposed to policy) is generally a waste of time.