It seems possible that during a tumultuous weekend to say the least, that there was never any paperwork done on Sam Altman actually leaving OpenAI.
Say he was handed the notice over Google Meet, and the board expected to handle the paperwork on Monday, but that didn't come to happen because there were bigger fish to fry at the time.
Note that the burden of proof is on the YES side here, and it needs to be both overwhelming and publicly accessible! Needs to be convincing proof in terms of an explicit statement (mentioning a signed notice, which days Sam wasn't at the company, or the like), documentation, or the like. Maybe it already exists, in which case the mana is yours for the taking. This resolves NO if I have still not been convinced at/around closing date June 30th 2024. It can resolve YES at any time before that, given enough evidence.
I won't trade in this market, and will resolve it to the best of my ability.
Related questions
@firstuserhere Iʻm not sure that meets the requirement:
Needs to be convincing proof in terms of an explicit statement (mentioning a signed notice, which days Sam wasn't at the company, or the like), documentation, or the like.
In other words, it's easy to imagine a scenario where Altman was told he was fired, accepted an offer from the new board, and announced it as "returning" but he and the board know they didn't actually fulfill all the necessary conditions to fire him. (As a specific example, when I served on the board of a non profit tech foundation, our bylaws required all board members to be notified in advance of a meeting; it sounds like Brockman wasn't in the meeting to fire Altman, so maybe he wasn't notified about the meeting and maybe that was against their bylaws, making the firing legally questionable.)
which days Sam wasn't CEO
Hang on, you only want overwhelming evidence he wasn't CEO, not that he departed the company entirely? Please clarify if we're talking about employment/affiliation generally, or CEO status more specifically.
If CEO status only, you don't consider the appointment of two separate interim CEOs, as announced by OpenAI, sufficient?
@chrisjbillington I would cite the board firing him as CEO - I believe that is 100% official, he stopped being CEO for sure. However, that doesn't imply he was no longer an employee in any sense. The need for a guess pass, however, does.
@chrisjbillington I think this is pretty good, but not quite enough to be "overwhelming" consider the confusing situation.
In the scenario I described in description, you could easily see how he would have turned in "his gun and his badge", but without there actually being any paperwork.
Sorry if this bar seems crazy high. You can still sell your YES shares for a tiny loss if you think I'm too strict.
@HenriThunberg If he didn't sign any paperwork, why would he need to give away badge? I've never been fired, but my understanding is that you first file the paperwork, then give your badge. That's what happened when I was released from the army at least.