Yes. For one, it makes them vulnerable to blackmail, so their decisions can no longer be trusted.

But the cat is out of the bag, so the blackmail won't work anymore.

Please use the whole quote:

> I, as a shareholder, do not care if the CEO is having an affair so long as the business is not affected. If you can establish the latter, then his personal conduct is between him and his partner.

If you read the second sentence then you and I agree. I care if the business is affected, I don't if it is not and then the rest of this is a personal matter that doesn't need to be a news story because it is gossip.

Perhaps there should be an investigation? Perhaps the existing awareness of this relationship of his is cause for the board announcing publicly this investigation?

Sure? I didn't disagree with doing an investigation. I simply stated what I was curious to understand and what I cared about. It seems like a lot of people replying particularly care about the fact that he cheated on his wife.

> It seems like a lot of people replying particularly care about the fact that he cheated on his wife

People care because the cheating puts him in a potentially compromising situation, especially in the context of corporate espionage. It's not that complicated.

I think if you actually read this thread and others you'd find a laundry list of invented reasons people think it's significant. So, I think it is somewhat complicated, and I think it very much is up for debate.

> > I, as a shareholder, do not care if the CEO is having an affair so long as the business is not affected. If you can establish the latter, then his personal conduct is between him and his partner.

I, as a shareholder, do not care if the CEO is having an affair so long as the business is not affected

The CEO had an extramarital affair with a major client/customer's executive staff. The business is affected, until it's not.