[peter422]

The only title that a founder can have that matters more than "founder" is a CEO.

He calls himself a CTO, and that's fine, but he's really just a technical cofounder, and that's what he's acting like (and it sounds like it's a very positive thing for the company).

The CTO title and the whole point of the article are not really relevant, this entire situation would not be possible if he weren't a co-founder.

I think it is a good lesson that founders shouldn't necessarily be pigeon holed into roles they don't want, but the CTO title really has nothing to do with it.