related posts
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 9 May
I did talk about him earlier.
He still seems really indecisive about many of the things he wants to champion.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinAbhi 10 May
Overall interview is ok. We have to keep good things with us and bad things let go.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 10 May
For me Jack Dorsey is kinda person who remains in a lot of 'to say or not to say' regime. Sometimes he seems more inclined to favouring a decentralized speech and sometimes he is more like a centralized follower. He is somewhere in the middle.
reply
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @026180d3a3 9 May
As I said elsewhere, he's just making excuses for being a pansy.
reply
21 sats \ 6 replies \ @gmd 9 May
I thought his answers sounded reasonable. You can't just do what you want with a public company, there's a lot of politics and the board of directors has a lot of power.
reply
129 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 9 May
yeh, it really does put his interview on rogan in a new light.
At the time, I thought it was really limp-wristed interview.. To appear with your "PR sidekick chic" with you, often deferring questions to her, etc.
With the benefit of hindsight I see that whole debacle much different now. I see someone who basically already "checked out" and was like sure, I'll go on rogan but I'm not going to tell any of the lies the board wants....nor am I going to fall on my sword for you....so you better assign someone to come with me to do that
reply
64 sats \ 0 replies \ @nichro 10 May
Thought exactly the same. Been meaning to rewatch that Rogan ep because I distinctly remember how odd it was to have your lawyer there to answer everything.
Should be an interesting rewatch with the power of hindsight, knowing more things now (and the fun rumor that apparently that "PR chick/lawyer" cried in anger during a meeting when it was announced Elon bought Twitter [citation needed though])
reply
100 sats \ 3 replies \ @026180d3a3 10 May
A shill has a thousand excuses for why they can't do a thing. Still a shill.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @gmd 10 May
Always easy to criticize from the sidelines. Curious if you've run any large organizations? I've found it challenging to run even 5-7 person teams.
Going against your fiduciary responsibility to shareholders can have serious legal consequences.
reply
99 sats \ 1 reply \ @026180d3a3 10 May
I've run teams that scaled into 20-30 members and beyond. Letting money rule you and allowing that to do things like say--oh--corrupt an entire election--have worse consequences than some upset shareholders. If you aren't sure about the difference, ask Judas.
reply
65 sats \ 0 replies \ @gmd 10 May
That's fair. I think he's a typical precocious human with no prior CEO experience before running a global multi billion dollar company and 8+/10 probably succumb to similar pressures.
reply