<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>sama</author><text>If the founders have been working on the company for awhile I&apos;ll usually agree to a shorter vesting schedule.  That said, one of my favorite things in the world is when a founder proposes 6-year vesting for a company they&apos;ve already been working on for awhile to set the right standard for everyone else.</text><parent_chain><item><author>mindcrime</author><text>&lt;i&gt;All founders equity shall be subject to a repurchase right which also reflects a standard 4 year vesting schedule.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;If we were taking outside money tomorrow, this would be a point of contention.  I understand the idea behind a vesting schedule for founders (the investors don&apos;t want you to walk away two days after they invest), and I might grudgingly agree to something like that.  But no way would I ever agree to make 100% of my founder equity subject to vesting or repurchase.  The bottom line is, I&apos;ve spend 2+ years working on this company, and without the work I (and the other co-founders) have put in, there is no company, no valuation, no nothing.  I&apos;m not going to put all of that equity at risk just to make an investor feel good.  If we&apos;re all supposed to &quot;be in this together&quot; and have aligned interests, they would have to accept that we&apos;ve already earned the right to a significant portion of the company.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>A founder-friendly term sheet</title><url>http://blog.samaltman.com/a-founder-friendly-term-sheet</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>kogir</author><text>In the (hopefully) unlikely case one founder has to be fired by the others, this keeps incentives properly aligned.&lt;p&gt;Few things are as demoralizing as needing to fire a co-founder in the first place, but if they keep the same equity stake as the founders who remain it&apos;s worlds worse.</text><parent_chain><item><author>mindcrime</author><text>&lt;i&gt;All founders equity shall be subject to a repurchase right which also reflects a standard 4 year vesting schedule.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;If we were taking outside money tomorrow, this would be a point of contention.  I understand the idea behind a vesting schedule for founders (the investors don&apos;t want you to walk away two days after they invest), and I might grudgingly agree to something like that.  But no way would I ever agree to make 100% of my founder equity subject to vesting or repurchase.  The bottom line is, I&apos;ve spend 2+ years working on this company, and without the work I (and the other co-founders) have put in, there is no company, no valuation, no nothing.  I&apos;m not going to put all of that equity at risk just to make an investor feel good.  If we&apos;re all supposed to &quot;be in this together&quot; and have aligned interests, they would have to accept that we&apos;ve already earned the right to a significant portion of the company.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>A founder-friendly term sheet</title><url>http://blog.samaltman.com/a-founder-friendly-term-sheet</url></story>