I doubt that anyone, even someone as extreme as your example, would care enough about it a decade after it happened. More egregious things would have happened in the meantime.
Extending a job offer to someone means you met with them on multiple occasions, remotely and in person. I know I am not going to forget their face in 10 years. Would I feel a bit less wronged about them after 10 years? Of course. Would I lie in a backchannel reference? No.
How does a founder with twenty years of experience bear such grudges against a single errant hire that got away? Either this whole hypothetical is talking about an employee number one type situation, or you must have been blessed with having never met anyone underhanded in all of your business dealings.
"Feeling a bit less wronged" is one thing, "making sure that everyone knows how I feel about you" is quite another.
Sure, but your initial post did not express that sensible middle ground, but rather invoked decade-long grudges using hyperbolic petulance, as if being a founder grants the power to hellban someone from society.
It goes both ways. If anything, I would argue that employees have way more cancel power than founders, and it's far more common for employees to get their founders in trouble than the other way around. No VC will ever do an equity round without doing some research. Not to mention the open letters to founders that have gotten so many fired. Honestly, it's also how it should be - I've seen more founders misbehave than employees. Some founders really think that just because someone gave them a check, they are somehow untouchable.
But regardless if founder or employee, I don't see why we should lie about people misbehaving. If I know someone is a bad apple, I am not going to lie about it - especially if I can prevent someone I care about going through the same ordeal. I also don't know why I should change my mind about someone just because some time has passed. People don't change.
It's frankly pretty appalling that I have to spell this out to you. I suppose you didn't think much of the Me Too movement? While clearly not on the same scale, the fundamental societal mechanics that justify outing perpetrators of sexual harassment are the same ones that justify outing people who break contracts. The society would be a much better place if people knew that karma is real.
The VC connection is another reason not to pursue scorched earth campaigns.
It’s a double-edged spear. Eventually someone you dislike will have a VC deal pending; if your defamatory comments cost them the deal (or even appear to have had a role), that person will end up owning everything you have and everything you ever will have after a massive court judgment.
And on the flip side, VCs dislike investing in people who are in litigation or who have faced it. You will have to do a lot of explaining about why you were sued, and if there was a judgment against you, it’s hard to imagine your professional judgment not getting questioned.
It doesn’t matter- Whatever merit there is to your position, your original post was so wrapped up in hyperbole and aggression you completely undercut your own argument, which is why there is such a bevy of responses. I don’t even disagree with some of your points, but the tone-deafness is just completely ridiculous. Let us simply agree to disagree where we do, agree to agree elsewhere, and have peace.
I doubt your memory and vengeance is nearly as crazy a decade since any event (however wronged by it you may perceive yourself to be) -- let alone something as incredibly benign as someone rescinding an offer.
In short, while you say that now, I highly doubt it actually would be the case were this hypothetical a reality. You'd have to be incredibly thin-skinned and vengeful to carry this much weight to something so minor.
