Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Why I abandoned my startup (westonmcbride.com)
120 points by westonmcbride on May 14, 2013 | hide | past | favorite | 74 comments

'Doing work for money, especially when you have passions and interests in something bigger, is the most soul-sucking and demoralizing thing you can do.'

You have lived a very sheltered life.

This comment gets better if you rewrite it to avoid the "you", such that it doesn't read like a personal attack. For example: "Many people would be thrilled for their biggest problem in life to be working, for money." That implicitly suggests the benefits of a broader perspective without suggesting any fault on behalf of the author.

Perhaps the GP comment could have been better phrased, but read it in impersonal "you" tone and it will make more sense and sound a lot less like a personal attack (which I think it isn't).

Stupid statements such as the quoted one should be called out. (Living a sheltered life is not anyone's fault by the way.)

I came here to write this. But then I notice that he said "especially when you have passions and interests in something bigger ...". So you see he's got an escape-hatch there. The people who think the most soul-sucking and demoralizing thing they've ever done is watched their own child literally shit himself to death for lack of drinkable water are still correct. Their greatest conceivable passion and interest is working for money, so they don't qualify.

Indeed. Most people who are afraid of failure are people who simply can't afford failure. They are supporting their family, their family is not supporting them. It's a nice problem to have if your fear of failure is simply based on ego. That said, it is nice to become the family that can support the younger generation being able to follow their passions, and support them in favour.

I'm not sure people's sense of unhappiness is particularly finely grained. Plenty of people kill themselves in situations that most people in history would probably have found enviable.

It may well be that working for money is the most miserable he can be, that any further stimuli would fail to make him any more so.

He is clearly sheltered, but he has a point. Most people live demoralized, defeated, horrible lives, and corporate work is the cause because it truly sucks. But let's remember that exceptions can happen for any of us. May the odds be ever in your favor.

Personally, I'm OK with working for money as long as I'm actually paid-- at a consulting rate, not a 40-hour engagement. At $500 an hour, I'll do boring work (for a couple hundred hours). If I'm going to be spending 40 hours per week at it, though, for a middle-class salary; the work damn well better be worth doing.

I am all for doing what makes you happy etc... i just found the comment hilarious.

People on earth are getting killed, raped, enslaved, women are stripping to put clothes on their kids back, etc etc etc

working for money is not the most soul sucking horrible thing ever.

Everything doesnt need to be over the top melodrama, dude didnt like his job, quit it to pursue something he found more meaningful, good for him... i hope the angle he is on does lead to some improvement in the world. but the writing style is annoying.

OTOH, if those living "sheltered lives" do not have this "melodramatic" sense of purpose and passion for changing the world, then who will help those being killed, raped, enslaved, etc?

>>Most people live demoralized, defeated, horrible lives, and corporate work is the cause because it truly sucks.

I agree, to this 100%.

>>At $500 an hour, I'll do boring work (for a couple hundred hours).

$500/hr * 8 hrs/day is $4000 per day or $20,000 per week or $80,000 per month. How does one go about by finding such a job?

I am darn serious and I'm asking you. Do you know how to find such work?

Note: In my country(India) $80,000 comes to around. 40,00,000 per month. That's simply too much, If I ever get paid that much- Frankly speaking I don't even how to spend it.

I think he was saying that if somebody were to pay him that much, he would do the work for a while. I don't think he necessarily makes that much (at least not consistently). There are very few professions that pay that level of salary. A few that come to mind would be some corporate executives, a few specialized types of doctors, top lawyers, coaches of college or professional sporting teams, and presidents of some major universities.

==== She went on: “If you have conviction and the right solution, you can get in front of anyone [to raise money, strike a partnership, build a team, etc], so what are you waiting for? You’ve already shown you can build a team and a product, you have the technical background to solve this problem. How does a liquidity event really make a big difference? Why continue being miserable?” ====

You've also now demonstrated that you'll drop everything - that investor money, staff, customers, etc, because you don't like something. How will potable water investors react knowing this story? Part of being successful is sticking through with something.

"How does a liquidity event really make a big difference?" If he was really going to exit at $200MM, I'm assuming a decent portion would have gone to him. Having a bank of, say, $10MM should be more than enough to start his potable water business without having to go to investors to get things started the next time (assuming, that is, he believes enough in it to invest a chunk of his own money, not just someone else's).

The article states that he transitioned out of the company over 4 weeks, presumably the company was able to go on without him.

I don't think investors will take it badly, I don't think they really want to have a founder who's heart isn't in it anymore slaving away at half pace in the hope of making something from the business.

Oh Weston, I'm in your shoes.

I'm dreaming for a day when I can start a business that installs high powered vacuum suction motors and large hoses into 20 foot utility box trucks so I can help clean the billions of tons of trash that plague our cities.

When I had time I created a hobby of cleaning up small forests and unclaimed land from trash. I'd show up in a green construction vest so people thought I was official and didn't ask questions and would bag all the trash I could find and weighed the bags on a scale. I've got an excel sheet with all my stats. I've picked up over 570 lbs of trash to date. Just in wrappers, McDonalds cups, styrofoam. It's heart breaking to see an area trashy 5 months after I cleaned it up. I stopped doing it because I started wishing death and destruction to the people who littered. It made me angry and bitter towards humanity. I was picking up its trash and it didn't give a damn. I try to ignore it but every time I see trash on the side of the road a part of me keeps saying, "You should invent something that makes it easier to clean that up, think of how clean the whole world could be". The little voice keeps saying "Imagine a giant movable vaccum cleaner mounted on a truck with large hoses sticking out. It could work. Just try.". I can't stop thinking about it.

Your story has actually inspired me to try to go ahead and pursue that dream. If it's one thing tax payers are willing to pay for it's less trash in their neighborhood.

Anyone interested shoot me an email chris at norcophoenix dot com. I know an electrician, a guy who knows where to order the trucks from, and some really cheap office space for startups. I'm in St. Louis Missouri btw.

I might totally misunderstand you as English is not my native tongue, but in Germany - and I assume in many other parts of Europe - there are large trucks that go around streets and smaller ones in parks that have vacuums and suck up the trash.

Not sure if your idea was the invention or starting a service business to offer street cleaning services.

Even in St. Louis (Missouri, USA) there are street sweepers that basically look like this http://cityofgrandterrace.org/images/pages/N278/image002.jpg with brushes that move dirt and small items around and a (weak?) vacuum cleaner, as well as little trucks that are used to vacuum-clean things like parking lots like this http://bestservices1.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/7684... (from the name, I'd guess that it's of German manufacture). Therefore, I'm guessing that our young friend here has something else in mind.

They only clean the streets. Not the grassy areas around which is where the trash accumulates.

"small forests and unclaimed land from trash"

Sounds like a slightly different approach - rather than having a vacuum cleaner of wheels (which can't go off-road). Have an "industrial" version of a standard canister/cylinder cleaner with a very long hose that can be used to clean grass/bushes.

Sounds like a pretty good idea to me!

Yes, this is used here too, looks like a truck with a vacuum cleaner for offroad, forrest or side of the road. Don't know about cleaning bushed though :-)

Yep, this is the French version, albeit we also have larger ones:


Road sweepers I believe they are called.

When I was visiting St. Petersburg, I saw that along Nevsky Prospekt (essentially the Fifth Ave of St. Petersburg) sanitation workers were using these large mounted vacuums to clean the streets. They weren't like tracks but rather like carts with a large, vertical component (I assume the vacuum parts) out of which came a hose. They did a pretty good job cleaning up the trash and detritus I saw along the Prospekt.

Your idea definitely has some credence.

> I stopped doing it because I started wishing death and destruction to the people who littered.

"The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small - and for destroying those who destroy the earth." (Revelation 11:18)

You might find a kindred spirit in Terry Gross' recent interview with David Sedaris. He talked about what he does to relax at his English country manor: rides his bike around the exquisitely beautiful countryside and picks up trash.

I believe what you're missing from the equation is doing something profitable with that trash: either burning it to make energy (capturing the emissions in a filter and selling those, too), or something else.

>> I just have to sell this mobile shopping company for $200M

And then..

>>But my girlfriend challenged this: “How does selling a consumer app company help you disrupt the potable water market?” She was right, and I knew it.

In the same way Bill Gates can solve problems like Polio, Hunger and Poverty by using his fortune. You need money to solve the world's problems, Is this really so hard to understand?

If you have no money you can't solve your own problems. Let alone the world's problems. Without money you will be left working crazy hours to solve your own miniscule problems which aren't relevant beyond house's front door.

You were right there, if you had sold that start up for $200 million. You could take your cut, then spend rest of your life focusing your time, energy and passion on the problems you are interested to solve without worrying about mortgage, debts or anything.

Bill Gates didn't become that rich by thinking "I'll build this software company, sell it and then do what I'm passionate about". He became successful by following his passion, and was then able to be philanthropic. People who are passionate about saving the world will be far more likely to change the world by focusing on that and use other people's money to do so.

The point is if you're miserable in your job, and you could be doing something else anyway you should change. Which is what makes it different from the other soul destroying examples mentioned. Go back to Maslow's hierarchy of needs and self actualisation. It could be arguably worse to look back on a squandered life when you know it could be different, those who have no opportunity to change their fate do suffer, but in a different way - they aren't the ones causing their misery.

He was still doing philanthrophic stuff well before stepping down, and it was that much easier to do because he'd stuck with making MS a success first. One can have multiple passions in life, and still prioritize attention to each.

It is both funny and sad to read.

So you decided to shed away your chances of success and the financial capacity to back up the projects you believe in +5 years, +10 years, +15 years from now (etc.) for the time preference of working right now on a project - because there is a water problem in this world.

Tell me, what are you going to do about hunger?

If you really cared about the water problem, couldn't you have donated part of your (steady) income for that?

If you prefer to fix the problem yourself, what are your special skills or experience regarding water?

What are you going to do if your project is deemed "interesting" but not worth investing on - especially now that you won't be able to finance it yourself?

You must certainly place a lot of trust in the goodwill of the future investors, but basically, here you showed that you didn't care about what you were doing, so why should I or anyone else take your word that you won't drop your next project just as quickly as this one?

Unless there is some missing information (ex: you have a 10 years lifespan due to some disease), it doesn't look like refusing the deferred life, but more like taking unneeded risk to get social status (saying you presented at this "Solve for X" conference) under a bleeding heart pretense. Sorry if that's hard - that's just the way I see it.

Anyway, it really seems like a bad decision indeed. If you really hated the job so much, it then begs the question - why did you started it in the first place?

I really hope you can turn around successfully, and find more meaning in your projects.

EDIT: it is good for him, and he will be more happy, but it's not logical. Something sounds out of place in the original post. While he will be more happy, using a charity purpose as the excuse and justification, while it is unlikely to be the best outcome for society, seems phony. Say that you want some fun or social status, that I can believe in. If you really care about solving a problem, who solves it (yourself or someone else) is irrelevant. How it is solved is irrelevant. You just want that fixed. Caring about not getting rich is just as pointless as caring about getting rich. It is a byproduct. You should want to solve the f problem, not want or look for ways to spend your life working on it.

> If you really cared about the water problem, couldn't you have donated part of your (steady) income for that?


There are tons of great organizations (non-profits, etc.) that are already doing wonderful things in a variety of areas. Even the ones with considerable human resources, knowledge, relationships, infrastructure and donor bases usually typically have a need for more support. What these organizations need less of: duplicative efforts that produce fragmentation and are likely to see good ideas die quietly because those trying to do their own thing couldn't obtain the resources to execute.

It's sad that so many well-intentioned, idealistic people apparently fail to recognize or refuse to believe that minute for minute and dollar for dollar, their time and money will almost always produce a far greater ROI when invested in existing efforts.

I strongly disagree. People ought not to let themselves be talked out of unreasonable dreams of greatness. Your comment reads to me like depression distilled into words.

This isn't about being talked out of trying to do good. It's about finding the best way to actually do good.

Most organizations rely on outsiders who contribute their time, money, expertise and ideas, and they gladly welcome such contributions. By getting involved with an established organization, individuals can often take advantage of its existing resources, increasing the likelihood that whatever is contributed will produce an ROI.

Obviously there's no absolute guarantee of this, and I wouldn't suggest that there's no room for new organizations, but new non-profits are a lot like new businesses: most do not "succeed", and a lot of the ones that don't fail outright plod along and never achieve what was hoped for. It doesn't take more than a quick read of a few random Form 990 filings to see this.

So to put it simply: you do not need to start your own thing to help solve big problems. People who have the itch to save the world would be wise to consider that they are far more likely to make a bigger impact by channeling their time, money, passion and ideas to organizations that have been saving the world for years.

Yep. I think individuals can choose to work directly or indirectly on a problem and both are worthy. But Buffet didn't start his own foundation, he gave a bunch of money to Gates because duplicating all that infrastructure would be wasteful. I really respected that...

This is akin to advising would-be entrepreneurs to instead invest their time and money into existing companies because it's more efficient.

My jaw dropped when I read this, and then I felt sick. It's so dismaying to check in on HN threads and encounter this degree of nastiness and self-parody.

Good for you, Weston. I look forward to hearing about your dragon-slaying adventures.

One of the things I try to do is learn from my experience, even when its a crappy experience I try to take something away that gives me a bit of meaning to that time I'll never get back. But that is not the way with everyone.

Some people believe very strongly that collecting the most revenue in the time you have available on the earth is the best possible pursuit a person can have. They do not understand anyone who doesn't share their passion to achieve the highest number of dollars or yuan or yen or rupees.

The real test of belief comes at the end of your life, but during the middle part you believe what you believe.

Consequently any story of following one's passion rather than money will be discounted by folks who don't share that belief, and any story of finding ways to get richer and richer will be discounted by folks who don't share that belief. When you are friends with folks who have one view or the other, and your friendship spans decades, you get a chance to see if you or your friends change views over time.

For a long time I internally beat myself up for not taking Bill Gates up on a job offer in 1978 (chances are if I had stuck with the company I'd be very wealthy now), but as I got older and perhaps more importantly had people I had known well die, I came to appreciate the choices I've made on passions vs money. Not everyone does of course.

I totally agree with you. Some people really see making money as the number one goal of life. I found it very frustrating to interact with such people. They calibrate everything with money. If you ask them whether it is a good idea to learn or study something, they will immediately ask you if learning it would help you make money afterwards. They would treat you nice if they believe you are rich or you will make money in the future..They will abandon you after they find out that you can't make too much money..

Money can come or go. But you only live once.


>>Money can come or go

Except that money doesn't just magically come and go.

>>But you only live once.

Try living in poverty. Trust me you will see all happiness in money.

I am currently homeless, which is certainly annoying as hell. But I have been through far worse things. You are barking up the wrong tree. I know firsthand that money problems are not the worst thing in the world, though poverty is also not as simple as lack of money.

I suppose that depends on what you believe ;)

I've learned that being negative or spiteful toward people who are actively building things isn't helpful.

Keep on slaying dragons Weston. Even when I'm not passionate about what someone's building, I'm always supportive of people executing. Keep going Weston.

>> Tell me, what are you going to do about hunger?

>> If you really cared about the water problem, couldn't you have donated part of your (steady) income for that?

Lets look at this way - Regarding donating (or paying some one to do what you wanted to do) - Just look around and you will see serial entrepreneurs building their next company bootstrapping from their previous savings. They could well have paid some one to do it (coding, managing etc). Still you will see then right in the middle of the action. The simple reason is, most people love it.

Now regarding if you can't solve all the issues, then you should not solve anything (what are you going to do about hunger,,,) . So I want to solve the issues with payment processing and I plan to start a Paypal alternative. Here comes some one asking me "what about all these issues with banking " what about "all the other 1000s of problems with the financial sector" ? Can you solve everything ? If not, you should are you trying to just solve a Paypal issue ?

>Lets look at this way - Regarding donating (or paying some one to do what you wanted to do) - Just look around and you will see serial entrepreneurs building their next company bootstrapping from their previous savings. They could well have paid some one to do it (coding, managing etc). Still you will see then right in the middle of the action. The simple reason is, most people love it.

Sure. If you want to do this yourself because you love it, great. But don't pretend it's because you can't stand the thought of some people being without water - if that was really the issue, you'd care about the most efficient way to solve this rather than doing it yourself.

>If you really cared about the water problem, couldn't you have donated part of your (steady) income for that?

There's lot of scientists whose life objective is to solve a variety of world's problems and they don't want to become rich.

The point is, this guy did not want to be in a startup, he wanted to work directly on doing something to solve the World's water prblem. That's good for him, and IMO it does not make his decision worse than staying doing something that did not fully satisfied him anymore.

Heh, sometimes doing now what you can, is right.

But sometimes, you cannot do it.

I have great life plans, but I am moneyless (in fact, having money to by my own food each month is a small victory already), mostly friendless, and powerless (in the sense I do not have political power, or economic power, or friends to leverage, or any other external power).

So I am very sure, that doing something else other than my goal, as a step to do my goal, is not wrong...

By the way, what I do right now I still love to do anyway :) (I make edu apps for little children... not my life goal, but still a noble thing to do, and I hope, profitable)

"The question left me sick to my stomach." "I went to bed that night with my head spinning." "...I had been living... in the 'trance of fear.'" "I knew that I was powerfully unhappy..., but I was powerless to do anything about it" "That revelation liberated me." "I was buying my life back."

dude, reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelax.

sounds like you are about to do some cool stuff. excited to see what you come up with.

but, just so you have a different perspective, this is what i heard: you are leaving one company to start another company. the new company does water stuff, and you really like that.

A raw, introspective recap of why I left my last startup. I hope it helps some people realized what I did - that it is not worth it to do something that you don't love. Would appreciate any feedback!

I've never regretted making a change to my life when I discovered I was unhappy. Kudos on the tough decision!

Why doesn't the site let me zoom (iPad Mini)?

Good read though, even if I had to strain my old eyes.

While you're here, just a quick heads up: the prices on the front page of crowdtest.io is not showing up on my computer (win7-chrome latest).

See http://prntscr.com/14u0i7

Just went and fixed this. Thanks for the heads up.

If you've got an app you want to test, shoot me an email and we'll cover your first test.

I'm pretty sure that having a lot of money would give you a head start in solving the world's water problems (or whatever problems you happen to care about).

Elon Musk didn't start off founding SpaceX, his first big hit was PayPal right? So I'm sure that "online transactions" was about as boring to an aspiring space entrepreneur as "online shopping" is to you, Weston.

Anyway, decisions other people make often look weird to people observing from the peanut gallery - most of all when you make a decision that feels so right it's almost impossible to "unmake" you usually know that, for whatever reason and with whatever reasoning, you've made the right decision for you, now.

On the topic of solving the world's water problems, I'm reminded of a documentary I saw years ago by a Ghanaian national in Nigeria, the name of which escapes me and which I can't find anywhere. It was around the time of the "make poverty history" campaign. This guy went to Nigeria and tried to do a few basic things like get a house, find a job, etc. and found that at every turn he was faced by rampant corruption. He even setup an NGO and started accepting foreign aid with very little trouble.

The final line in the film is "If you want to solve poverty, you first have to solve corruption" which has always stuck with me.

I'm mentioning this because it may be the case that "solving the water problem" for the majority of people won't be a matter of the (relatively) simple application of technology, but a matter of the much more complex application of political will, diplomacy and grass roots activism. You might already have considered this, but since I remembered the doco I thought I'd mention it, too: sometimes there are problems you have to solve before you solve the problem you really want to solve.

Gates has said something like "automation multiplies effeciencies in an efficient system and multiplies inefficiencies in an inefficient one." The same can apply to money. I have read that 70% of lottery winners are bankrupt within five years.

Money can grease the wheels but cannot buy a solution that does not exist. That is bought with things like blood, sweat and tears, so to speak.

Please say more about the new problem you're solving. I think lots of people would like to help if they understood how they could make a useful contribution. An article explaining the root of the problem (which is more complicated than "there isn't enough water") would be well received here.

Yes sir, more to come on that. Happy to chat about my rough hypotheses in the meantime. Feel free to e-mail me at westonmcbride at gmail dot com.

I've felt like this many times in my career, especially when work gets hard. One thing I realized though is that one has to do what he does best. If it's selling a web-app - that's fine. Look at Elon Musk - he sold PayPal and then went on to use the money to fund world-changing initiatives. You shouldn't underestimate how many smart people there are working on world changing initiates, even in places like university labs. Unfortunately world-changing research doesn't pay well. Elon Musk on the other hand is a great example of hacking the system - making money the capitalist way, and then fund initiatives you want to be remembered for. It's a risk-reward trade-off of course, but something tells me if you'd think you could walk away with 100M in 2 years from your startup and use the money to solve the world's water problem - you'd probably do that. As usual it just comes down to your estimate in the gains in your startup over the next several years, versus what you think your time is worth.

My guess is that you're in your low to mid 20's, a time when most have achieved some modicum of independence, feel they have the world at their fingertips, and usually, that they deserve said world.

I remember it well, not with fondness, but regret, because decisions like these cost me the better part of 7-10 years of my life.

Perhaps this is a great decision, only time will tell, but there's something to be said for patience and persistance that leads me to believe this could be a dangerous decision. Here's why...

Your chances of a 200m exit are the same as most, and I don't think it's something you could or should have banked on. On the surface, this looks like a lateral move, and my guess is that the occupational differences won't matter in the long run.

What will matter is the behavior you have exhibited in making this choice.

We gain what we grant ourselves, and in this case, you've granted yourself a rush of impulse, which can lead to addiction and a selfish nature that can become toxic. I don't know you and I can't judge you for it, but from the outside, it seems to me like you are used to always getting what you want, and haven't had to struggle for much.

It's OK to want more, and to believe that you should have it. What isn't OK, is being selfish in your path to get there.

It's strange because we live in this society that celebrates impulse and selfishness as if it were our birthright. I'm talking to you, lifestyle gurus. On the other hand, we also celebrate steadfast determination and 'grinding it out.' In my experience, success comes as a result both in concert together, but because 'grinding it out' takes long-term effort, most throw it out the window.

What I'm getting at is that regardless of what you want, and how quickly you believe you should have it, each and every one of your decisions affects other people. In this case, your decision affects friends, family, founders, investors, and customers. Perhaps there was minimal collateral damage, and it sounds like you were mature in the way you handled this decision, but do remember that it's not just 'your life' at stake. It's everyone's.

I'm sure this was a difficult decision, and I applaud you for having the guts to make it and follow through. Just make sure you don't spend the next portion of your life repeating the same behavior because it suits the selfish gene. Now that you've acted on impulse, it's time to stick to it and make that decision count. It's time to do the work.

Awesome to see "The Monk and the Riddle" referenced, it should be required reading for startup people.

I actually said out loud: “My name is Weston McBride, and I can do whatever I want to. I will approach this problem with enthusiasm unknown to mankind, and I feel sorry for anything that gets in my way.”

Were you looking in the mirror when you said it?

I'll admit that comment is kind of facetious, but I've long wondered whether these sort of self-motivational things ever have a meaningful effect on anything.

Anyway, the core truth that this post runs around is that running a startup isn't for everyone. If it was for you, you'd still be doing it. Running a charity might not be either, but it is healthy to re-examine your life at regular intervals and evaluate whether you really are doing the right thing.

this reminds me of a quote from the opening for "this week in startups" hosted by jason calacanis http://thisweekinstartups.com, he quotes ruby on rails founder, david heinemeier hansson, "if you're not working on your best idea right now, you're doing it wrong."

ideas are a dime a dozen, but think about the one idea that you'd be willing to lose sleep, money, time, life, over. the fact that you're passionate about it will probably justify all that.

there are always exceptions, but i think it makes sense, life is short.

on the flip side, i think experience gained doesn't hurt one bit.

For people who come up with ideas all the time, "work on your best idea right now", taken literally, is paralyzing. And determining what "best" is is, at best, difficult to do.

Without money or credibility it's quite likely that you'll find yourself still doing the startup grind in two years, without having raised money or not even having a company with paying companies. During these two years you'll also find yourself only being able to work on your dream startup 30% of the time, because you have to get money in for the remaining 70% with things you don't love doing.

So probably better selling that $200M startup and then start your dream business with $10M in the pocket?

Pursuing your passion: bravo.

In reading this, however, I can't help but read into it a belief of the "inevitability of success". Instead of a $200M exit, you might not see $200. (In which case your decision looks even better.) However, your pursuit of clean water might not be successful either: inability to raise money, technologies issues, uncooperative or greedy governments, etc.

I disagree wholeheartedly. Money, a reputation and a tract record are equally important to enthusiasm. Look at what Elon Musk has accomplished with his reputation and money multiplying his enthusiasm. Look at what Bill Gates has done with his money. Who has that kind of impact with conviction alone? Deferred plans can still be plans.

I understand why you left, but what do your cofounders, investors and team members think about your sudden departure?

your story is basically about a guy who quit a job which doesn't make him happy. adding the unlikely possibility of making $200MM by selling the company and starting working for charity doesn't really change anything?

Isn't the "potable water market" saturated with startups and NGOs?

Thanks for this. As someone thinking about doing the similar, I was very happy to hear about someone else's story. Keep up!

Weston what's your hashtag or email address?

weston [at] crowdtest.io

Good luck!

Sounds to me like his girlfriend got him jealous.

Seriously, if he could quit a start up and go into charity over night I don't think his bank account was hurting.

It always amusing to me how people try to pet their egos, oh hey guys I'm loaded so I'm going to quit my job and sell water to poor kids.

Please look how kind I am, everybody else is so selfish and stuck at work because they are not loaded!

Yes, perhaps there is ego involved. But at least it's blended with some wonder and some love. That's better than the form of it that you're expressing here, which is black bile. I wonder why people don't see that when they pour this stuff on others, they're pouring it on themselves as well.

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