Hopefully this will get forked and the CEO will learn a lesson of respect and self control.
However, I'm curious how
Copperhead the company can send these letters demanding that the 50%
co-owner do this or that. As equal owner, couldn't he respond to these
letters by asking the company lawyers to send a letter back to the CEO
making similar demands? Is the CEO "more in control" than the CTO
because CEO is a higher position, even though they're equal partners?
It sounds like the CEO de facto controls the company in
this case, and can ignore the other shareholder at will. He could block
communications with him and basically have a silent partner.
Edit: should note (although
obvious) I am not privy to all the conversations these parties have had
so I am only aware of what has been posted.
I mean, I understand the desire to stand up for oneself, but there are probably better avenues that a CEO should take.
could you possibly gain that would be a net gain from commenting here?
Aren't you concerned about customer and investor blow back from you
simply commenting outside of a legal letter seeking a peaceful
Also, the tweets seem to have been deleted, did anyone archive them?
Micay is still a majority shareholder of Copperhead and thus, any
damage he does to the company with this leaking (and media coverage) is
damaging himself and the Company we've all worked for.
says quite clearly that you a) believe copyright belongs to the
company, b) want him to give all access to infrastructure, c) revoke his
access to Copperhead branding.
What exactly have I got wrong or over-simplified?
It seems possible one of them is a bad egg. Or
perhaps they have just had a very bad falling out. It does appear to be
the case that because one guy is a/the coder, everyone is being more
sympathetic to him. I haven't chosen a side yet - and I'm still reading
Hopefully this gets resolved and after it the bad egg (if one exists) leaves the company.
(Also I think it's super weird for you to use HN as a forum to push this dispute.)
I think @CopperheadOS changed their twitter ID to @DanielMicay. If you
go to Google's cache of @CopperheadOS  and click on the date next to
one of the tweets (example ), it redirects to the live version of the
tweet under @DanielMicay.
 May 22 https://twitter.com/CopperheadOS/status/998953746833944576
> This account covers the technical side of CopperheadOS.
>Please send all questions about sales to email@example.com.
>The customer support system should be used for official support or the subreddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/CopperheadOS/ ) for community support.
> Can't help with either here."
These conflicts should be resolved by the board.
Lesson learned - we started Copperhead as privacy advocates and hackers, not MBA infused business developers.
hoping there is a peaceful resolution to this. It's VERY unfortunate
that Daniel Micay is airing dirty laundry - internal confidential
documents that are directed towards him (ironically, from a @gmail.com
account,as he refuses to answer from his @copperhead.co address now).
ESPECIALLY from a company asset (@copperheadOS) that is damaging to
Copperhead the company, our users and our employees.
As it currently stands, Daniel Micay has been and still is a majority shareholder of Copperhead.
I'm interested and open to discussions regarding these issues. Feel free to email me - firstname.lastname@example.org
I've been advised that getting involved can only unfortunately only
further complicate things. Feel free to reach out to me with questions.
Thanks for the feedback everyone.
What you're doing is despicable and unfair. Please resign.
Tell me, does your employer's CEO have as many commits in the codebase as you do?
If not, why are you working for this CEO instead of for yourself?
not my story to tell at all, as someone who's not a Rust core
contributor or anything (and certainly wasn't at the time), but http://slash-r-slash-rust.github.io/archived/2u1dme.html
is part of it. (IIRC the /r/rust mods archived that thread on GitHub as
a compromise between deleting something from Reddit and leaving
something Googleable with his name.) There was a lot of dirty laundry in
public and my impression is that neither he nor the Rust core
maintainers left that situation happy.
all about benefit of the doubt. It's obviously biting us in the butt
right now, but again - I'm hoping for a peaceful resolution.
>ironically, from a @gmail.com account,as he refuses to answer from his @copperhead.co address now
now that the cat is out of the bag: if you notice, the letters are
addressed to email@example.com because he refused to answer (or use
PGP regarding these answers, which has me believe he's okay with Google
reading our internal drama) using his Copperhead email address.
Why do you think that is?
> However, now that the cat is out of the bag