Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is the 'funny' part for me:

"Such moves reportedly violated AOL's code of employee conduct, but Arrington received an exemption."

Back when Sarbanes-Oxley regulations were all the rage, the 'code of conduct' was something the CEO and everyone else 'signed off on' (literally) on penalty of perjury, that employees and management adhered to the stated code. The idea was that not only were they swearing to follow the rules, there was a way to criminally prosecute them if they did not. Some investor backlash from the abuses in the dot-com bubble. In that context the definition of 'exemption' is 'no longer employed here.' :-)

So AOL has gone on record saying that its the 'mostly' code of conduct which some folks don't actually have to follow. So where does that fall on the Sarbanes-Oxley scale? Is this a shareholder lawsuit waiting to happen? I hope not for Michael's sake.

So how hard is it to decide what to work on? Some careers don't have a lot of overlap, things like 'arms dealer' and 'diplomat', really hard to do both. Michael, if you're reading this, and I know you are since you read HN, I advise you to choose and then let the other one go. It will save you so much pain down the road.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: