3 ms·

They funded a homophobic political campaign. Websites started user agent detecting Firefox and putting banners saying to not use Firefox because of their homop

by Jonnax 7y ago

They funded a homophobic political campaign. Websites started user agent detecting Firefox and putting banners saying to not use Firefox because of their homophobic CEO. It's pathetic that people like you hide behind censorship arguments and "diversity of thought" when defending the right to attack minorities. This kind of disingenuous thinking makes me question anyone evangelising Brave as a web browser.

ecmascript 7y ago
Just because someone donate to a political campaign that wants to stop same-sex marriage doesn't automatically make that person homophobic. He didn't attack any minority, stop spreading objectively false information. I am defending his right to believe whatever he likes in private. It will be a quick downhill (as we already have seen) as soon as you start listing bad values and try to hate on people that have these values. You may think I'm pathetic if you wish, I don't care. But remember, I will defend your right to your opinion too. It's kind of obvious you do not believe in the same thing and if more people would be like you we would find ourselves in a dark dystopia. You could move to China, they are well on their way to building the kind of society you seem to strive for. :)
- Jonnax 7y ago
  "Just because someone donate to a political campaign that wants to stop same-sex marriage doesn't automatically make that person homophobic." Really? What's the point in arguing stupid semantics. People are defined by their actions. He has a right to believe what he wants. He also has to accept the consequences of those beliefs. At the end of the day it's just a job. As CEO or an executive you're a figurehead. Your actions are publicly associated with the company you head. You can decry the evils of "wokeness" or "social justice" but it's also the right of the employees of the company to complain or even campaign against the CEO. Why is one political campaign acceptable and another not? Because it really seems like you just don't agree with the politics of one. Your disingenuousness is what I'm calling pathetic. Like calling up China? An authoritarian country where the state owns all business whilst discussing the actions of a private company in America. There are plenty of conservative companies in the USA which would be fine with his political contributions. The idea of having no social consequences or accountability for your actions isn't a Chinese thing and it isn't an American thing. But it seems to be an effective playbook adopted by conservatives worldwide. But anyway, it's not like I'm going to change your mind :)
qbaqbaqba 7y ago
One website.

by Jonnax 7y ago

ecmascript 7y ago

Just because someone donate to a political campaign that wants to stop same-sex marriage doesn't automatically make that person homophobic. He didn't attack any minority, stop spreading objectively false information. I am defending his right to believe whatever he likes in private. It will be a quick downhill (as we already have seen) as soon as you start listing bad values and try to hate on people that have these values. You may think I'm pathetic if you wish, I don't care. But remember, I will defend your right to your opinion too. It's kind of obvious you do not believe in the same thing and if more people would be like you we would find ourselves in a dark dystopia. You could move to China, they are well on their way to building the kind of society you seem to strive for. :)

Jonnax 7y ago
"Just because someone donate to a political campaign that wants to stop same-sex marriage doesn't automatically make that person homophobic." Really? What's the point in arguing stupid semantics. People are defined by their actions. He has a right to believe what he wants. He also has to accept the consequences of those beliefs. At the end of the day it's just a job. As CEO or an executive you're a figurehead. Your actions are publicly associated with the company you head. You can decry the evils of "wokeness" or "social justice" but it's also the right of the employees of the company to complain or even campaign against the CEO. Why is one political campaign acceptable and another not? Because it really seems like you just don't agree with the politics of one. Your disingenuousness is what I'm calling pathetic. Like calling up China? An authoritarian country where the state owns all business whilst discussing the actions of a private company in America. There are plenty of conservative companies in the USA which would be fine with his political contributions. The idea of having no social consequences or accountability for your actions isn't a Chinese thing and it isn't an American thing. But it seems to be an effective playbook adopted by conservatives worldwide. But anyway, it's not like I'm going to change your mind :)

qbaqbaqba 7y ago

One website.