<i>For members of the tech community I believe it’s quite cowardly to give opinions, for print, without willing to be named as a source.</i><p>I take the other angle -- it&#x27;s quite cowardly (and shitty) for junior &quot;founders&quot; to take advantage of, or otherwise make life miserable for early employees in the ways they are prone to doing: bait-and-switch games with regard to compensation, equity, or verbal agreements; plain old harassment in sexual or other forms; or just sheer incompetence[1] -- and then expect these employees to not only take their lumps financially and emotionally, but to keep forever silent about it -- on fear of appearing &quot;embittered&quot; or &quot;vindictive.&quot;<p>So to those feel they need to keep their anonymity, in order to prevent the damage and humiliation they suffered from living on any further -- as long as they are being truthful, they have my understanding and support.<p>That is to say: in the right circumstances, there&#x27;s nothing shameful about preferring to stay anonymous for the sake one&#x27;s sanity and financial health.  And in some cases, it may be downright prudent and necessary -- and for the better good of us all.<p>[1] &quot;We&#x27;re sorry things were kind of rough here for you at the beginning.  Management was 23 years old, and very inexperienced&quot; was what was told to a friend of mine after moving across country to join a startup that promptly went bust, 6 weeks later -- sans severance, of course.