Comment on Unity deleted these terms, don't let them get out
Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 1 year agoIt will cost them in future earnings… Companies won’t want to work on their platform if these policies are still in place… and many will never want to work with them again since they’ve shown their hand.
pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
That is what makes me think there’s something more to this.
I think rival companies might groom CEOs that get hired by their competitors but whom, secretly, are paid by the rivals to destroy the companies from within.
Perhaps I’m wrong but that’s the only explanation I’ve been able to come up with that makes any sense to me.
jarfil@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The CEOs don’t need to be paid by other companies. All a competing company needs to do, is to convince some company’s board members to hire a CEO with a track record that they know will tank the company… maybe through indirect lobbying, maybe by hinting they want to hire them because it’s “such a valuable CEO”… and bam!
CEO ruins company, then bails on a golden parachute, and you only had to spend whatever it took to mislead the competing board.
(I’ve seen it done to tiny companies with as few as 20 workers, it’s surprisingly easy to convince a board to hire someone who will destroy everything)
topinambour_rex@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What’s the point to do this ?
jarfil@lemmy.world 1 year ago
To destroy the competition.
pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
How does one insulate a company from corrupted CEOs?
Ignisnex@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Technically that’s what a board of directors is for. They are the ones who can axe a CEO and hire another.