6 ms·

See below - he was chased out by the mob. Interesting that any comment stating this is getting downvoted. Tells it all really.

austhrow743 6y ago
He had the support of the board and a couple of dissenting employees. Could have cleared house and you know, actually lead if he wanted to but instead fled and surrendered Mozilla to the SJWs.
- read_if_gay_ 6y ago
  Like it’s that simple. I want to see you “clear house and actually lead” when a huge internet fucking hate mob is after you.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    CEOs tend to have a pretty thick skin. If you think it is a fun job you should try it for a while. And it didn't stop Eich from starting up another company. Besides that, he wasn't forced out, that part of the narrative is simply false. CEOs have been - rightfully, in many cases - accused of far worse than this and have sailed through just fine. That said, if my employees en-masse demanded that I resigned I might have done so as well. After all, the internet hate mob is easy to ignore but the employees you work with every day are not.
    - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
      The internet hate mob is not just mean tweets though. Some people are crazy enough to go after your family, try to get them fired, stuff like that. Basically, it’s resign “voluntarily” or we will continue to terrorize you and your family.
    - BrendanEich 6y ago
      No one working for me demanded I resigned when I was at Mozilla. Six people working for the Mozilla Foundation, under separate management up to a separate board with only the board chair in common between the Corporation where I worked and the Foundation, did tweet demands.
  - CamperBob2 6y ago
    Well, to be fair, he contributed $1000 to a huge real-life fucking hate mob. Ramble on about 'SJWs' or 'cancel culture' or whatever if you like, but the fact is that social actions have social consequences, and this is an example.
    - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
      But this kind of consequence is just way over the line. We have a legal system where everyone sat down and agreed on very clearly defined appropriate consequences, while cancel culture is just emotionally driven people taking matters into their own hands, not really different from medieval witch hunts.
      - Qwertious 6y ago
        You do have a legal system, but nobody in this situation did anything illegal. Clearly what "everyone sat down and agreed on" is insufficient, when both sides are saying that "thing X the other party did was legal but inappropriate".
        read_if_gay_ 6y ago
        The legal system is absolutely insufficient and there’s no way it can ever not be, but the point is only one party is resorting to mob justice.
        Talanes 6y ago
        Ballot initiatives are just legalized mob justice, so no.
        read_if_gay_ 6y ago
        Ballot initiatives aren’t commonly getting random people fired for political wrongthink, so yes.
  - austhrow743 6y ago
    I didn't sign up to fight a huge internet fucking hate mob. Dudes an out and proud homophobe and accepted a position of public interest in California. That was always going to be a showdown between the only the tech matters and social justice types. There's no way he didn't know it and there's no way the board members didn't know it. A board member resigned about it before he took the position. He signed up for and was sent out of the gate as a champion for team tech only and promptly fled the battlefield. Team tech only refuses to accept their defeat.
rtpg 6y ago
Turns out if most of your employees dislike you then it's going to be hard to be an effective leader! This is despite him having had many opportunities to take outs/apologize etc. He could have even lied when apologizing! He made a choice to stick to his "principles" instead. Of course you face consequences for this kind of behaviour. This is extremely non-controversial in any other social setting, why would running a company be different? Why is being forced out for being a bad person seen as this new phenomenon when people stop interacting with people they dislike _all the time_?
- CodeGlitch 6y ago
  > He could have even lied when apologizing! He made a choice to stick to his "principles" instead. I can't believe what I'm reading here. We all have different principles. Lying whilst "apologizing" isn't really apologizing is it?
  - rtpg 6y ago
    right but it doesn't actually matter. He had a choice and a way to keep his job if he wanted to. People do stuff in bad faith all the time! It's not the sign of perfect morals but it's a thing one can do if they want to keep certain relationships healthy. He actively chose between "have a good relationship with employees at Mozilla" and "stick to his guns on the issue at hand". He made that decision, and had a hell of a lot of agency in how things turned out. Granted this was a while ago, but imagine being so committed to anti-marriage equality that you do what he did? Why do you feel the need to carry water for somebody doing that?
    - funcDropShadow 6y ago
      Just to be clear. You prefer people lying while apologizing over people who disagree with you? Do you, at all, consider, at least sometimes, that people that disagree with you might have to say something intelligent about their position? I am not trying to defend homophobism, irrespective of the question of Brendan Eichs action or believes are homophobe, or not. But, I do believe that somebody disagreeing with me, might have something to tell me. I believe even that it is boring to talk to people with whom I agree on everything, although it is comforting and easy. There is value in communicating with people of different believes, standpoints, intellectual fields, religions, or sexual orientation or ... . Therefore, I cannot fathom how people can prefer being lied to.

austhrow743 6y ago

He had the support of the board and a couple of dissenting employees. Could have cleared house and you know, actually lead if he wanted to but instead fled and surrendered Mozilla to the SJWs.

read_if_gay_ 6y ago
Like it’s that simple. I want to see you “clear house and actually lead” when a huge internet fucking hate mob is after you.
- jacquesm 6y ago
  CEOs tend to have a pretty thick skin. If you think it is a fun job you should try it for a while. And it didn't stop Eich from starting up another company. Besides that, he wasn't forced out, that part of the narrative is simply false. CEOs have been - rightfully, in many cases - accused of far worse than this and have sailed through just fine. That said, if my employees en-masse demanded that I resigned I might have done so as well. After all, the internet hate mob is easy to ignore but the employees you work with every day are not.
  - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
    The internet hate mob is not just mean tweets though. Some people are crazy enough to go after your family, try to get them fired, stuff like that. Basically, it’s resign “voluntarily” or we will continue to terrorize you and your family.
  - BrendanEich 6y ago
    No one working for me demanded I resigned when I was at Mozilla. Six people working for the Mozilla Foundation, under separate management up to a separate board with only the board chair in common between the Corporation where I worked and the Foundation, did tweet demands.
- CamperBob2 6y ago
  Well, to be fair, he contributed $1000 to a huge real-life fucking hate mob. Ramble on about 'SJWs' or 'cancel culture' or whatever if you like, but the fact is that social actions have social consequences, and this is an example.
  - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
    But this kind of consequence is just way over the line. We have a legal system where everyone sat down and agreed on very clearly defined appropriate consequences, while cancel culture is just emotionally driven people taking matters into their own hands, not really different from medieval witch hunts.
    - Qwertious 6y ago
      You do have a legal system, but nobody in this situation did anything illegal. Clearly what "everyone sat down and agreed on" is insufficient, when both sides are saying that "thing X the other party did was legal but inappropriate".
      - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
        The legal system is absolutely insufficient and there’s no way it can ever not be, but the point is only one party is resorting to mob justice.
        Talanes 6y ago
        Ballot initiatives are just legalized mob justice, so no.
        read_if_gay_ 6y ago
        Ballot initiatives aren’t commonly getting random people fired for political wrongthink, so yes.
- austhrow743 6y ago
  I didn't sign up to fight a huge internet fucking hate mob. Dudes an out and proud homophobe and accepted a position of public interest in California. That was always going to be a showdown between the only the tech matters and social justice types. There's no way he didn't know it and there's no way the board members didn't know it. A board member resigned about it before he took the position. He signed up for and was sent out of the gate as a champion for team tech only and promptly fled the battlefield. Team tech only refuses to accept their defeat.

rtpg 6y ago

Turns out if most of your employees dislike you then it's going to be hard to be an effective leader! This is despite him having had many opportunities to take outs/apologize etc. He could have even lied when apologizing! He made a choice to stick to his "principles" instead. Of course you face consequences for this kind of behaviour. This is extremely non-controversial in any other social setting, why would running a company be different? Why is being forced out for being a bad person seen as this new phenomenon when people stop interacting with people they dislike _all the time_?

CodeGlitch 6y ago
> He could have even lied when apologizing! He made a choice to stick to his "principles" instead. I can't believe what I'm reading here. We all have different principles. Lying whilst "apologizing" isn't really apologizing is it?
- rtpg 6y ago
  right but it doesn't actually matter. He had a choice and a way to keep his job if he wanted to. People do stuff in bad faith all the time! It's not the sign of perfect morals but it's a thing one can do if they want to keep certain relationships healthy. He actively chose between "have a good relationship with employees at Mozilla" and "stick to his guns on the issue at hand". He made that decision, and had a hell of a lot of agency in how things turned out. Granted this was a while ago, but imagine being so committed to anti-marriage equality that you do what he did? Why do you feel the need to carry water for somebody doing that?
  - funcDropShadow 6y ago
    Just to be clear. You prefer people lying while apologizing over people who disagree with you? Do you, at all, consider, at least sometimes, that people that disagree with you might have to say something intelligent about their position? I am not trying to defend homophobism, irrespective of the question of Brendan Eichs action or believes are homophobe, or not. But, I do believe that somebody disagreeing with me, might have something to tell me. I believe even that it is boring to talk to people with whom I agree on everything, although it is comforting and easy. There is value in communicating with people of different believes, standpoints, intellectual fields, religions, or sexual orientation or ... . Therefore, I cannot fathom how people can prefer being lied to.