[Meta] Community Discussion: Employee verses Founder definition for rules/possible rules change. Make your voice known!

I removed a post made by somebody today because it looked to me like they were looking to hire an employee with a specific skill set, and not really include a founder; I did this because they already had a partially working product and already had people on their team as employees.

This is one of the most common reasons I have to remove posts; People posting who are looking to hire specific skillsets cheaply under market, and claim its them just looking for a founder, when that is not really the case. They really just want a dev, or somebody to build the thing, as a worker employee who doesn't get equity or who gets so little equity that they basically get diluted out. Typically, what happens is that a company has grown to the point where they want/have to hire somebody specific to grow, and they're still stuck mentally in the mindset of them being a startup, or they like that title and want to abuse it, so they reach for that founder title or play like its needed, when in reality, they are a business now because they employ people, and they just don't know it, or just do not want to admit it, because that means they are too big to post in this community and so would have to hire somebody on the free market and pay a respectable and fair market wage for that skill.

Basically, my current rule is that if you hire a single employee, you can no longer come here asking for founders. Thats the bar. My thinking was "Congrats, you grew up. You are a business now. You are now responsible for a persons livelihood, they depend on you, so get your f*cking shit together and act like an adult."

Or put another way: - If you hire a SINGLE PERSON as an employee, you have crossed the line from including cofounders to hiring an employee, and are no longer allowed to hire founders, or its simply considered unfair to the employee who was hired as an employee but put in more work than that person who didn't exist while they were hustling. Its also unfair to the people not getting paid while that employee was getting a paycheck. It may even be illegal to do that to them, depending on where you live.

This is why I remove posts that try to hire for specific skillsets when projects are too big; your just looking for an employee, not a founder, because you already hired employees.

But I was told today that this was bad logic; so I'm going to give you all the opportunity to have me change the rules by making logical and rational arguments that are not trolling, with the understanding that I have personally created this subreddit and maintained it and moderated it by myself for over 10 years and its doing just fine, I don't need to do this, but because I'm the sort of person who is open to it, I am doing so, because, who knows, maybe I'm wrong. I dont know what I don't know.

So I'm opening the floor of discussion on rule changes around this and asking:

1. What is YOUR definition of a founder verses an employee?
2. Where/when should a company stop hiring cofounders?
3. What are fair terms that we can enforce as a definition of a stable and fair title/situation, if not my original definition above?

If you have other issues about the rules, bring them up, kindly.