I think calling it a "palace coup" gives it an inappropriate framing of what happened.
I definitely think that how the board handled the situation was very inept, and I think the naivety over the blowback they would receive was one of the most surprising things for me. But after reading more about the details of what happened, and particularly writings and interviews given by the former board members, I don't think any of them did this out of any particular lust for power, or even as some sort of payback for a grudge. It seemed like all of them had real, valid concerns over Sam's leadership. Did those concerns warrant Sam's firing? From what I've read, I'm of the opinion they didn't, but obviously as just some rando on the Internet, what do I know. But I do think that there were substantive issues in question, and calling it a "palace coup" diminishes these valid concerns in my mind.
At the time, Sam was more powerful than Ilya for sure. But framing their relationship as employee/employer when they were both in the board seems not correct.
Exactly. He’s only founded and led a company that’s built some of the most easily adoptable and exciting innovations in human-computer interactions in the last decade. Total fraud!
it said one was "easily one of the greatest", and it said the second was "also easily one of the greatest"... it's puffery but it's not an awkward or mindless formulation.
I thought so, but they must've changed a lot then. In any case it's not like the type of message they wrote is something special, and it's just usual polite PR.
I've been offered a "lump" of sugar before, and it was not a single sugar crystal. When I hear "large grain of salt" I imagine something like this https://crystalverse.com/sodium-chloride-crystals/, quite different than a lump.
