[emadm]

"The increasing amount of time Altman spent at OpenAI riled longtime partners at Y Combinator, who began losing faith in him as a leader. The firm’s leaders asked him to resign, and he left as president in March 2019. Graham said it was his wife’s doing. “If anyone ‘fired’ Sam, it was Jessica, not me,” he said. “But it would be wrong to use the word ‘fired’ because he agreed immediately.” Jessica Livingston said her husband was correct. To smooth his exit, Altman proposed he move from president to chairman. He pre-emptively published a blog post on the firm’s website announcing the change. But the firm’s partnership had never agreed, and the announcement was later scrubbed from the post. For years, even some of Altman’s closest associates—including Peter Thiel, Altman’s first backer for Hydrazine—didn’t know the circumstances behind Altman’s departure. "

From the Wall Street journal

https://archive.is/WiqtZ#selection-1177.0-1207.168

[uxcolumbo]

Didn't know Thiel was one of Altman's closest associates. Might explain a few things, e.g. maybe he got some useful tips from Thiel how to acquire and maintain power at all costs ; )

[causal]

I agree with everyone saying this is not technically being fired, but PG's tweet omits the important context of YC partners losing faith in Sam as a leader.

[hn_throwaway_99]

I think this is really important context:

> To smooth his exit, Altman proposed he move from president to chairman. He pre-emptively published a blog post on the firm’s website announcing the change. But the firm’s partnership had never agreed, and the announcement was later scrubbed from the post.

That's just f'ing weird in my opinion. Actually publishing a blog post saying you transitioned to chairman before the partners had agreed??? I've generally defended the "naughtiness" that YC famously valued, because I thought it was usually misconstrued by its detractors. But that doesn't at all come across as "naughtiness" to me, it comes across as borderline psycho.

[sigmoid10]

"You can't fire me if I quit first."

But seriously, this tweet doesn't claim that WSJ is wrong, it's just a different spin. If you have an upcoming lucrative side business and your employer comes and says "hey bro, it's either us or them" then this is not technically a "firing" if you chose the other one. But let's not pretend like there was much choice here in the first place. For all intents and purposes, he was made to leave.