4 ms·

The very act of censoring people bringing up her past behavior is very indicative that they're fully aware of the double standards within their community.

wonderwonder 9y ago
Indeed. I don't think people should be punished their entire lives for statements they made in the past. A very simple, "we are aware of the statments that X has made in the past and they have assured us that they regret them and will not be a concern going forward." would go a long way. But if the individual stands by those same public comments calling for violence against a particular race or ethnicity then cause for concern is justified. By silencing that concern they are not doing themselves or anyone else a favor.
- RandomTisk 9y ago
  Accepting an apology means the deed can no longer be used as a Casus Belli for activism. There's a whole political movement predicated on this idea.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- jeffdavis 9y ago
  At Mozilla it's more complicated because they fired the CEO who gave money to a conservative cause in the past.
  - jonny_eh 9y ago
    To be fair, it was for the anti-gay marriage prop, not just some generic right wing thing.
    - xya3453 9y ago
      To be fair, promoting gendercide is not even in the same ballpark as only supporting heterosexual marriage.
    - jeffdavis 9y ago
      There are always facts particular to each case. That's why arguments can continue forever -- there is always some mitigating factor you can point to that makes your side OK. But if you are objective about it you would probably come to the conclusion that conservative political viewpoints or support will hurt you in the SF area, but even radical liberal viewpoints will not. The prop was, by any measure, mainstream at the time. It may have been on the wrong side of history, but remember that even Obama expressed a lack of support for gay marriage in the past. Any political issue seems like the most important thing in the world if you look closely enough and lose perspective. Let's move on. Any political position even close to the mainstream should not cost you your job unless you are a politician. But political stuff, for the most part, should not take over the workplace either.
      - Chaebixi 9y ago
        > Let's move on. Any political position even close to the mainstream should not cost you your job unless you are a politician. But political stuff, for the most part, should not take over the workplace either. Here, here! Many people seem to need to learn how be able to create some distance between themselves and their ideas, so they can put those ideas away when its appropriate and interact with others on different levels.
      - stcredzero 9y ago
        But if you are objective about it you would probably come to the conclusion that conservative political viewpoints or support will hurt you in the SF area, but even radical liberal viewpoints will not. Even those viewpoints radical to the level of inciting violence.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      To be fair, it was for the anti-gay marriage prop, not just some generic right wing thing. When someone peacefully, nonviolently supports the wrong cause, it should be appreciated. It's the very fact that places like the US can settle political debates and get on with life without resorting to violence which makes the USA such a great place to live. There's a reason why the ability to transfer power and make policy peacefully is measured in development indexes. If you want to gauge the justice of a side, then look for their benevolence and intellectual honesty. If you want to speak truth to power, then look to the side that's hounding people out of their jobs and trying to intimidate their enemies into silence. Nelson Mandela called his commissions, "Truth and Reconciliation" commissions, not "let's look back and see who was on the wrong side and dismantle their lives" commissions.
  - gnicholas 9y ago
    Technically they didn't fire him—he resigned after a loud/extended uproar. It may have been illegal for Mozilla to fire him for this donation because in CA political activity constitutes a protected class.

wonderwonder 9y ago

Indeed. I don't think people should be punished their entire lives for statements they made in the past. A very simple, "we are aware of the statments that X has made in the past and they have assured us that they regret them and will not be a concern going forward." would go a long way. But if the individual stands by those same public comments calling for violence against a particular race or ethnicity then cause for concern is justified. By silencing that concern they are not doing themselves or anyone else a favor.

RandomTisk 9y ago
Accepting an apology means the deed can no longer be used as a Casus Belli for activism. There's a whole political movement predicated on this idea.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
jeffdavis 9y ago
At Mozilla it's more complicated because they fired the CEO who gave money to a conservative cause in the past.
- jonny_eh 9y ago
  To be fair, it was for the anti-gay marriage prop, not just some generic right wing thing.
  - xya3453 9y ago
    To be fair, promoting gendercide is not even in the same ballpark as only supporting heterosexual marriage.
  - jeffdavis 9y ago
    There are always facts particular to each case. That's why arguments can continue forever -- there is always some mitigating factor you can point to that makes your side OK. But if you are objective about it you would probably come to the conclusion that conservative political viewpoints or support will hurt you in the SF area, but even radical liberal viewpoints will not. The prop was, by any measure, mainstream at the time. It may have been on the wrong side of history, but remember that even Obama expressed a lack of support for gay marriage in the past. Any political issue seems like the most important thing in the world if you look closely enough and lose perspective. Let's move on. Any political position even close to the mainstream should not cost you your job unless you are a politician. But political stuff, for the most part, should not take over the workplace either.
    - Chaebixi 9y ago
      > Let's move on. Any political position even close to the mainstream should not cost you your job unless you are a politician. But political stuff, for the most part, should not take over the workplace either. Here, here! Many people seem to need to learn how be able to create some distance between themselves and their ideas, so they can put those ideas away when its appropriate and interact with others on different levels.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      But if you are objective about it you would probably come to the conclusion that conservative political viewpoints or support will hurt you in the SF area, but even radical liberal viewpoints will not. Even those viewpoints radical to the level of inciting violence.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    To be fair, it was for the anti-gay marriage prop, not just some generic right wing thing. When someone peacefully, nonviolently supports the wrong cause, it should be appreciated. It's the very fact that places like the US can settle political debates and get on with life without resorting to violence which makes the USA such a great place to live. There's a reason why the ability to transfer power and make policy peacefully is measured in development indexes. If you want to gauge the justice of a side, then look for their benevolence and intellectual honesty. If you want to speak truth to power, then look to the side that's hounding people out of their jobs and trying to intimidate their enemies into silence. Nelson Mandela called his commissions, "Truth and Reconciliation" commissions, not "let's look back and see who was on the wrong side and dismantle their lives" commissions.
- gnicholas 9y ago
  Technically they didn't fire him—he resigned after a loud/extended uproar. It may have been illegal for Mozilla to fire him for this donation because in CA political activity constitutes a protected class.