Comment by qarl
17 hours ago
Are you trying to argue that the CEO doesn't influence his company? Especially a CEO with almost no oversight from his board? A CEO who commits heinous immoral acts? When we're discussing whether the company was deceptive?
That's quite a stretch. You see it, right?
It's a shame you're refusing relevant information. Head in sand is not a good look.
We're saying, simply, that the CEO being personally odious doesn't mean the car is fake.
> doesn't mean
I didn't say it proved anything. But it raises the chances significantly. If this were a normal company, with a normal reputation, I wouldn't even raise the possibility. Given the situation - come on.
Surely you agree. Please tell me yes.
> Are you trying to argue that the CEO doesn't influence his company?
No
> No
Good!
Would you agree that he makes decisions for the company?
Like, for example, the decision to make a misleading demo? Would that be something the CEO would control?
I mean, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this horrible man doesn't decide what goes into his company's demos. Please explain if I am incorrect.
> Would you agree that he makes decisions for the company?
I mean he makes big decisions but he doesn’t make all decisions. Engineering directors and stuff make decisions. Just like any other company for the most part.
> Like, for example, the decision to make a misleading demo? Would that be something the CEO would control?
Sure - could be. Sometimes in technology or bleeding edge engineering products are demoed or showcased when they aren’t quite finished. Initial iPhone comes to mind.
> I mean, maybe I'm wrong.
You are
> Maybe this horrible man doesn't decide what goes into his company's demos. Please explain if I am incorrect.
So the engineers that built the car that I think many of us watched just do some crazy shit don’t happen or didn’t?
You’re so up in your own head about hating this guy (I can’t stand him either) you’re now saying things that happened, didn’t happen.
15 replies →