[mmxiii]

No, you certainly can't speak for me. I have no empathy or relevant experience regarding betrayal, I simply wanted to point out how your response was more irrational than rational.

You are right the majority consensus is betraying your buddy is bad. But do you see how without details, it's not possible to give actionable and helpful advice? You are parroting an abstraction that isn't necessarily impactful advice. Certainly most people already know this, and yet this sort of situation is not uncommon. Maybe this advice isn't producing meaningful results? The fact is you don't know, because you don't have the relevant experience.

That's the first part of your advice. The second part is about deciding company ownership, and that's even more irrational, it doesn't really follow or is related to this relationship.

[crimsonalucard]

>But do you see how without details, it's not possible to give actionable and helpful advice?

You realize this entire thread is giving advice based off of the SAME details? How can it "not be possible" to give advice? Also I hope you realize that the OP is ASKING for advice?

>You are parroting an abstraction that isn't necessarily impactful advice. Certainly most people already know this, and yet this sort of situation is not uncommon.

Take a look at the post rank. Hackernews lifts up posts based on how recent it is, then it orders by karma. I'm number 5 on this entire thread. Here you make an assumption based on lack of facts. The fact that I am number 5 is literally quantitative proof I have a huge consensus. If I have a consensus it means people do NOT agree that I am "parroting an abstraction that isn't necessarily impactful advice"

>The fact is you don't know, because you don't have the relevant experience.

You instruct me not to speak for you, which I CLEARLY did not. Yet you do the exact same thing here? This is a hypocritical statement. How DO YOU KNOW I don't have the relevant experience? You just pulled that fact out of thin air; and in doing so you are parroting an abstraction that isn't necessarily impactful advice. Certainly most people already know this, and yet this sort of situation is not uncommon.

>That's the first part of your advice. The second part is about deciding company ownership, and that's even more irrational, it doesn't really follow or is related to this relationship.

The emotional aspects of the affair will bleed into the business situation, that's a given; it would be irrational to suggest it "doesn't really follow or is related to this relationship"

What your saying is like saying we can't put rapists in prison because the prison cell has nothing to do the with rape. If betraying your friend is a immoral, I am suggesting a moral punishment that will prevent further harm to the victim both from an emotional standpoint and financial. If the OP doesn't take my advice he would be harming his friend EVEN further by causing the team-up to become toxic or muscling his friend out. I am suggesting the most moral, least damaging option, which is utterly and completely rational.

[mmxiii]

Anyone can post any "advice' here. I explicitly stated that the class of advice you gave is not actionable or helpful. Not only is #5 not a particularly strong position, but the point I'm making is that statements that people have consensus about don't necessarily make advice that creates effective results.

You are so tunneled into the idea that betrayal is bad, that you are missing how the business is an entirely different entity. There are employees, customers, and investors all potentially affected by this outcome. In the case of a breakup, there is potentially a greater moral obligation to create the best result for the other parties, than just fixate on the betrayal of the victim.

Not to mention your idea of this requiring moral punishment is not something that would draw consensus on HN, or in general. That is your fantasy, not reality.