The Real History of TechCrunch
It seems the one fact that nobody is disputing is that the guy in question owned 10% of Techcrunch.  Generally people who own 10% of a company had significant involvement in it.  Not always, there are always edge cases, but that is a good general rule.<p>Maybe this is one of those edge cases.  But claiming somebody who owns 10% of the company had literally nothing to do with the company is an extraordinary claim that I&#x27;d say requires extraordinary evidence.  This blog post to me doesn&#x27;t seem like extraordinary evidence.<p>But really the conclusion of this saga is pretty irrelevant.  If somebody is investing in any type of business because an advisor to that business may or may not have co-founded a tech blog 12 years ago... well they have bigger problems.