The article is very clear a big part of the problem is that it's not just his personal life. "But the line between personal and professional has become ever thinner in the business world, leaving Jurvetson in a precarious position. That’s because several of the women making allegations work in the tech industry and first met him at professional conferences." It's a complex and risky situation the article describes very thoroughly and carefully.
Really? To me the article reads like moral mccarthyism. He sounds like a not nice person to be around, like a bad husband, but really, really, this is national news:
'And, indeed, multiple women whom Recode interviewed said their sexual relationships with Jurvetson were not forced, and did not involve an implicit workplace quid-pro-quo.
While the allegations do not resemble the scandals that have forced other powerful Silicon Valley men out of their jobs in recent months, they do shed some light on what investigators found.
“He’d sort of create a soap opera for himself,” said one of the women who dated Jurvetson, who requested anonymity to protect her career. “He lied to us.”`
and especially his part:
'A second woman who dated Jurvetson told Recode she was searching for career opportunities in venture capital and startups. The woman, who declined to give her real name out of professional concerns, said she only later realized he was also dating the first woman, although she herself was also seeing other men in what she described as an off-again, on-again relationship with Jurvetson.'
TFA helpfully summarized this in the subhead: "Jurvetson was asked to leave because DFJ caught him lying about what it considered serious allegations, a source said."
It's common for the cover-up, not the crime, to be the key reason behind a corporate action.
Comments
The article is very clear a big part of the problem is that it's not just his personal life. "But the line between personal and professional has become ever thinner in the business world, leaving Jurvetson in a precarious position. That’s because several of the women making allegations work in the tech industry and first met him at professional conferences." It's a complex and risky situation the article describes very thoroughly and carefully.
Really? To me the article reads like moral mccarthyism. He sounds like a not nice person to be around, like a bad husband, but really, really, this is national news:
'And, indeed, multiple women whom Recode interviewed said their sexual relationships with Jurvetson were not forced, and did not involve an implicit workplace quid-pro-quo.
While the allegations do not resemble the scandals that have forced other powerful Silicon Valley men out of their jobs in recent months, they do shed some light on what investigators found.
“He’d sort of create a soap opera for himself,” said one of the women who dated Jurvetson, who requested anonymity to protect her career. “He lied to us.”`
and especially his part:
'A second woman who dated Jurvetson told Recode she was searching for career opportunities in venture capital and startups. The woman, who declined to give her real name out of professional concerns, said she only later realized he was also dating the first woman, although she herself was also seeing other men in what she described as an off-again, on-again relationship with Jurvetson.'
What is the scandal here, or the story even?
TFA helpfully summarized this in the subhead: "Jurvetson was asked to leave because DFJ caught him lying about what it considered serious allegations, a source said."
It's common for the cover-up, not the crime, to be the key reason behind a corporate action.
Many people have this issue. People are very busy, so dating a colleague met at a work-related event is probably very common.
Think beyond the article: why him, why now, and who benefits?