I must have missed the part where contributing to her fundraising was mandatory….
Don’t like what she is doing to get her gig going, don’t contribute to it.
Seems pretty simple.
My hot take is that neither system can exist without the other….you need to power of capital from capitalism to fuel an economy and you need the social restraints of Socialism to tempter the excesses of capitalism. (And you can read that statement in opposite order).
It is up to each society to decide the “right” blend for themselves….but neither system can exist on its own. Capitalism in its truest form is a brutal, dehumanizing system and socialism in its truest form is not economically viable.
“Oh wow, the Chad’s Departure thread has a lot of new comments.”
50 comments later about capitalism and socialism…
I have some fuel.
Perhaps Nate’s “involuntary” statement was because he did not agree with Chads removal.
The decision might not have been his.
32 Likes
- We don’t know that was the case (fired for cause);
- Typically announcements make departure cause (firing for/without cause, or employee quitting) invisible, masking it all in “pursue new opportunities” and “all the best in his/her next endeavors” and all that stuff nobody believes anyway.
Why would the original co-founder - Nate - of the limited liability company that bootstrapped itself, give up control and not be in charge?
In a company with a single shareholder, I fail to see how that shareholder could have someone else impose a firing decision.
Meme FTW! 
AI. AT… Skynet. Were all doomed!
Me walking into this thread after not checking in since yesterday afternoon
Perhaps I was being unclear here. I think he was fired with cause, because the announcement that was made is very typical, in my opinion, for someone who is fired with cause.
I disagree with your point 2. If you read between the lines, you can usually differentiate between employee quitting, employee being laid off, and employee being fired. In the last case, it is usually a flat “X is no longer with the company, effective immediately” or similar.
When this thread gets to 1000 posts I’ll let everyone know what happened.
Source: Trust me bro.
I’ll say that it certainly doesnt help. I mean see my above comments…I clearly don’t have a great deal of respect for US companies and the way they operate. So I cant say that this debacle surprises me, but as you seem to be doing, it very well might be the impetus I need to check out other stuff. I’ve heard good things about Xert; I filled out a questionnaire for Fastcat coaching today.
Same feeling I had.
I think that’s a super unfair- bordering on discriminatory and defamatory - characterization of both Nate and Jonathan.
The why? Capital. He needed capital to expand. Does it mean someone else put up $$$ to assist with his vision and ultimately did not have complete control?
I do think this is a real tangent going sideways though. Answering my own response
I’m betting on a merger/buyout, possibly Zwift, and Chad is not needed at the new company. Time will tell. I wish him the best and appreciate his deep dive contributions over the years.
The biggest problem with the podcast has been letting everyone chime in. A 10 minute deep dive on Chad’s part would extend out to 25 minutes with everybody’s anecdotal 2 cents. The podcast got worse after covid and the presenters weren’t in the same room. Instead of a free flowing conversation, it went into round-robin, everybody gets a chance to comment, mode.
Chad was my favorite part of the podcast.