CFO = PWND

[Aharami]

very good indeed

 

[Goosemaster]

:laugh:

 

[altonb1]

Originally posted by: aswedc
Funny not found.

The only reason given in the article for the CFO being an asshole was that he wore $1000 suits and drove a Porche, and wanted to sell the company without them. Don't like capitalism? Either get out of become management yourself. Sounds like jealousy/revenge to me.

I'm sure none of the other employees ever watch porn :roll:

That's a really lousy way to look at this..... The employees gave there all to a start-up, the upper mgmt was screwing everone, including the board of directors and investors, and you don't see a problem?

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: aswedc
Funny not found.

The only reason given in the article for the CFO being an asshole was that he wore $1000 suits and drove a Porche, and wanted to sell the company without them. Don't like capitalism? Either get out of become management yourself. Sounds like jealousy/revenge to me.

I'm sure none of the other employees ever watch porn :roll:

are you one of those three who got fired?

 

[40Hands]

Great story. If true, even better!

 

[aswedc]

Originally posted by: altonb1

Originally posted by: aswedc
Funny not found.

The only reason given in the article for the CFO being an asshole was that he wore $1000 suits and drove a Porche, and wanted to sell the company without them. Don't like capitalism? Either get out of become management yourself. Sounds like jealousy/revenge to me.

I'm sure none of the other employees ever watch porn :roll:

That's a really lousy way to look at this..... The employees gave there all to a start-up, the upper mgmt was screwing everone, including the board of directors and investors, and you don't see a problem?

Yeah, it's a real ****** situation for the employees. But that's life.

The CFO's job is to help the company financially. Somehow I doubt the decision was made because everyone in management is evil, like so many geeks like to think.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: JS80
why weren't the geeks fired?

Who is going to rat them out?

 

[Feldenak]

Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: aswedc

Originally posted by: altonb1

Originally posted by: aswedc
Funny not found.

The only reason given in the article for the CFO being an asshole was that he wore $1000 suits and drove a Porche, and wanted to sell the company without them. Don't like capitalism? Either get out of become management yourself. Sounds like jealousy/revenge to me.

I'm sure none of the other employees ever watch porn :roll:

That's a really lousy way to look at this..... The employees gave there all to a start-up, the upper mgmt was screwing everone, including the board of directors and investors, and you don't see a problem?

Yeah, it's a real ****** situation for the employees. But that's life.

The CFO's job is to help the company financially. Somehow I doubt the decision was made because everyone in management is evil, like so many geeks like to think.

If the CFO was doing what he was hired to do, he wouldn't have been fired by the board of directors. Same for the COO and CEO.

 

[aswedc]

If the CFO was doing what he was hired to do, he wouldn't have been fired by the board of directors. Same for the COO and CEO.

We don't know if he was doing his job or not. But it seems like they were doing fine before this guy went renegade.

What board is going to keep a guy whose porn subscription has been broadcasted to everyone including those who are potentially going to buy the company?

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

Making the information public was probably going a little too far, but those workers did have a duty to inform the board (shareholders) of what was happening. Provided the story is true, what was happening under the tables must have been rather significant to make the sale fall through.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: aswedc

Originally posted by: altonb1

Originally posted by: aswedc
Funny not found.

The only reason given in the article for the CFO being an asshole was that he wore $1000 suits and drove a Porche, and wanted to sell the company without them. Don't like capitalism? Either get out of become management yourself. Sounds like jealousy/revenge to me.

I'm sure none of the other employees ever watch porn :roll:

That's a really lousy way to look at this..... The employees gave there all to a start-up, the upper mgmt was screwing everone, including the board of directors and investors, and you don't see a problem?

Yeah, it's a real ****** situation for the employees. But that's life.

The CFO's job is to help the company financially. Somehow I doubt the decision was made because everyone in management is evil, like so many geeks like to think.

Im sure the backdoor deals where the CEO, CFO, and COO make millions and the non management employees get nothing is NOT what the CFO was hired to do

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: aswedc

If the CFO was doing what he was hired to do, he wouldn't have been fired by the board of directors. Same for the COO and CEO.

We don't know if he was doing his job or not. But it seems like they were doing fine before this guy went renegade.

What board is going to keep a guy whose porn subscription has been broadcasted to everyone including those who are potentially going to buy the company?

If they only fired the CFO I'd buy that, but since they fired the COO and CEO I'm more inclined to believe that it was for the reason that was given in the article - they were trying to screw over the board of directors (and investors).

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: aswedc

If the CFO was doing what he was hired to do, he wouldn't have been fired by the board of directors. Same for the COO and CEO.

We don't know if he was doing his job or not. But it seems like they were doing fine before this guy went renegade.

What board is going to keep a guy whose porn subscription has been broadcasted to everyone including those who are potentially going to buy the company?

There would be no reason to dismiss the other officers just for the CFO's usage of the email system.

 

[aswedc]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

Making the information public was probably going a little too far, but those workers did have a duty to inform the board (shareholders) of what was happening. Provided the story is true, what was happening under the tables must have been rather significant to make the sale fall through.

Yeah, they should have informed the board. How about going and telling them instead of this email stunt?

Look, the CFO could have not been doing his job. That's not my point, and it's not the point of the article. What these IT guys did is completely out of line, and reeks of immature "taking it to the man".

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

Making the information public was probably going a little too far, but those workers did have a duty to inform the board (shareholders) of what was happening. Provided the story is true, what was happening under the tables must have been rather significant to make the sale fall through.

Informing the authorities about the CFO's affection for underage girls and notifying the board I could accept. Copying the CFO's mail out to the entire company is going to far. The mail admin and Security Officer should be fired as well.

 

[aswedc]

Originally posted by: CPA
bah, would have been better if they would have shown the underage porn email requests to the police and he was arrested for child pornography.

Oh, and about this underage porn thing, I'm not sure about a guy who is trying to make himself look good and claims a pay site had 17 year old girls.

First of all, 17 is suspiciously close to 18. Second, I don't know how a site has a credit card processor and is conducting business out in the open like that if they have underage models.

I say there's a good chance the age is an exaggeration in the telling of the story.

 

[Homerboy]

geeks should have informed the board of the going-ons and not taken the route they took. Hell if I was the board I sure as hell wouldn't want those geeks running my company's networks, not for fear of them snooping on me (I'm a firm believer that if you have nothing to hide, then why worry?) but for the fact that they resolved the situtation is a BEYOND on professional manner. Especially something of this size. Something like this happens again and now your a 300+ person business, sh!t gets out into the public and you no longer have a business... 300+ people unemployed etc etc.

 

[BrokenVisage]

CFOWNED

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: aswedc

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

Making the information public was probably going a little too far, but those workers did have a duty to inform the board (shareholders) of what was happening. Provided the story is true, what was happening under the tables must have been rather significant to make the sale fall through.

Yeah, they should have informed the board. How about going and telling them instead of this email stunt?

Look, the CFO could have not been doing his job. That's not my point, and it's not the point of the article. What these IT guys did is completely out of line, and reeks of immature "taking it to the man".

I would have considered it understandable given what they found. Had I been on that board they would have gotten a stern warning not to do something like that again and that?s about all.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

Making the information public was probably going a little too far, but those workers did have a duty to inform the board (shareholders) of what was happening. Provided the story is true, what was happening under the tables must have been rather significant to make the sale fall through.

Informing the authorities about the CFO's affection for underage girls and notifying the board I could accept. Copying the CFO's mail out to the entire company is going to far. The mail admin and Security Officer should be fired as well.

I would have given them a pass on this one with the firm understanding that nothing like this would ever happen again.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: aswedc

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Doesn't sound like the mail admin and IS Security officer are very trustworthy either.

Making the information public was probably going a little too far, but those workers did have a duty to inform the board (shareholders) of what was happening. Provided the story is true, what was happening under the tables must have been rather significant to make the sale fall through.

Yeah, they should have informed the board. How about going and telling them instead of this email stunt?

Look, the CFO could have not been doing his job. That's not my point, and it's not the point of the article. What these IT guys did is completely out of line, and reeks of immature "taking it to the man".

You don't get it do you? The CFO may very well have been performing his "normal" function perfectly fine. What he was fired for was negotiating deals that would line his own pockets instead of returniong these gains to the investors who had financed the company. Don't like it, don't steal from your investors.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: aswedc

Originally posted by: CPA
bah, would have been better if they would have shown the underage porn email requests to the police and he was arrested for child pornography.

Oh, and about this underage porn thing, I'm not sure about a guy who is trying to make himself look good and claims a pay site had 17 year old girls.

First of all, 17 is suspiciously close to 18. Second, I don't know how a site has a credit card processor and is conducting business out in the open like that if they have underage models.

I say there's a good chance the age is an exaggeration in the telling of the story.

Why? If it's a European site, chances are 17 is fine. I doubt the age is an exaggeration.

 

[aswedc]

You don't get it do you? The CFO may very well have been performing his "normal" function perfectly fine. What he was fired for was negotiating deals that would line his own pockets instead of returniong these gains to the investors who had financed the company. Don't like it, don't steal from your investors.

I don't think you read my post. It doesn't matter what the CFO was doing. Evidence of any wrongdoing should have been taken to the CEO or the board. This little prank by IT is totally unacceptable in any professional enviroment.

 

[aswedc]

Why? If it's a European site, chances are 17 is fine. I doubt the age is an exaggeration.

I wasn't aware of that. So does that make it illegal to visit some European web sites from the states?