He looks like a robot...

Duh? How could they expect Scott to understand the web? He's a newspaper guy with a fancy degree.

Damn. Nice teeth.

Neither him or Martin are serious Internet people even though Martin thinks he's one of the top thought leaders in the digital media space. I laugh when I think of that.

... and in other news from 1998 Britney Spears vows to stay a virgin until marriage.

The lack of imagination of the about.com people is astounding.

As someone that worked at About.com, Scott was a great proponent for the origanization and someone who was very close to the product as well as the other aspects of the organization. He wasn't just a biz dev. type. He ran a separate Web business within the Times before he joined About. The business is very profitable.

Any About.com employees who can give us the inside scoop on this?

@NYCType: So did he leave or was he pushed? And why?

This story is hooey. No senior staff at About.com would be so passionate about hating Scott as to threaten to walk out. No way, jose. You may not love Scott, but he's not so loathsome as all that. Although it does seem clear he was asked to leave, and not the other way around. But a mutiny? Nonsense.

About.com is a weird dinosaur.

Its SEO - clickbait - adfest - evergreen-content - daylabor-editorial model is icky to users in 2008, but they are the best at making money at what they do for as long as they can do it.

Its an income property, and I think anyone who tries to grow it will either have negligible effect or break it completely.

Mix that with scary reports on the state of CPC and that CEO seat doesn't look attractive to anyone.

LOOK @ HIS NUMBER

Funny. You'd think that Gawker would run this story if it had any merit.

He is actually leaving to under go dental surgery. He's having those chompers ripped out and having them replaced with wooden teeth.

I think his departure was mutual. He's been with the company since it was acquired and did a good job of dealing with many of the issues that come with an acquisition such as gaining the trust of the employees and bringing the organization up to par. I think it's at the next level in the cycle. I think the Times sees About as an ATM, and isn't willing to necessarily invest in securing talent and that's one of the big issues the company faces. Plus, the Times is a rigid organization and made limited investment in the company and probably don't understand the cultural nature of a true .com. I think the Times believes that financially About can do better, but it will be a matter of whether or not they'll be willing to actual make the investment and some of the chances and changes that come with the territory. It will be interesting to see who they appoint. If it's another person from the Times, I think we can expect to see more of the same.

The staff revolt was maybe 6 months ago. It wasn't an issue of passionate hatred as much as a sense of frustration working for someone with little to no vision. Scott did a good job of not rocking the boat, but what good is that?

So, bottom line...was this good or bad for the company?

As an Abouter who has been with the company for many years, I can tell you that this article is the joke going through the halls. If there was a revolt, that is news to the people here.

I don't know the other executives in silicon valley so I don't know if there would have been a better visionary. But take a minute to compare the financial results of About when Scott took over in 2005 (in the NY Times press releases) and in 2007, you will see a dramatic increase. If a CEO's job is about growing a company and generating profits, then Scott did a great job.

I got to know Scott when he was here and I can tell you he was personable and humble. Even though he was CEO he would get to know and care about the people who just started.

For those critics out there, NY Times did invest in About. Our staff has grown and unlike other web properties, we are actually trying to hire more people not lay off our existing staff. If you are talented, I urge you come to about.com and apply. Also, under the NY Times, we have been able to make acquisitions and redesign our site. Although we are looking to grow, we want to do so carefully. We all know some of the major blowups in the Internet space where company moved too fast and ended up regretting it.

I agree with Abouter, Scott did a good job of increasing revenue in his time at About. Another CEO is not going to do any better.