4 ms·

> Personally I think the bigger problem with Mozilla/FireFox is the lack of focus You do realize that you're contradicting yourself, right? Promoting cancel c

by tomp 6y ago

> Personally I think the bigger problem with Mozilla/FireFox is the lack of focus You do realize that you're contradicting yourself, right? Promoting cancel culture (ousting Eich) isn't exactly focusing on tech. Generally you can only pick one or the other

jacquesm 6y ago
No, there is no contradiction. The actions of the CEO and the actions of the employees are two entirely different things. The CEO could have been just focused on tech and could have left his political flags in the proverbial closet. Instead he chose to bring them out. Mozilla was already an entity that had made some pretty strong statements about diversity, inclusivity and their view of the open web. If you then stir up a shitstorm you will find you can no longer effectively focus on the tech either. So you can very well pick both: make all those statements, live by them, attract employees who see things likewise and then focus on the tech. But that's a glass house of your own making and if you then start hurling bricks it will have a terrible effect.
- erik_seaberg 6y ago
  He wasn't CEO during the prop. 8 campaign. I don't think we want everyone in tech permanently abstaining from politics just in case there might be a leadership role years later.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    It was close enough that it mattered, four years to be precise. If it had been decades ago it likely would have been a different matter. Dutch proverb: High trees catch a lot of wind. If you become a high tree, in politics or as a CEO then your past will come under scrutiny, and what is found there may very well have a direct effect on your present day life.
    - FeepingCreature 6y ago
      > It was close enough that it mattered, four years to be precise. If it had been decades ago it likely would have been a different matter. I highly doubt that.
    - kasabali 6y ago
      2014-2008=6 It's "close enough" only because you're trying to save face from your incorrect implication/claim you've repeated several times across different comments in this thread that he was the CEO when he did the donation.
      - jcranmer 6y ago
        It's also worth pointing out that public opinion has swung decisively and dramatically in that intervening time period--at least 20 percentage points IIRC.
      - jacquesm 6y ago
        2014-2010 = 4. It's close enough because right up until his apology Eich did not indicate in any way shape or form that he had changed his views on this. Only after it all blew up did he come with his apology. Sure, he wasn't CEO at the time he made his donation but when he stepped forward to become CEO he was well aware of his own position regarding this and knew that to effectively lead Mozilla would be impossible given his - apparently strongly held - views. At least, I'm assuming people do not donate to political causes they do not feel strongly about.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

by tomp 6y ago

jacquesm 6y ago

No, there is no contradiction. The actions of the CEO and the actions of the employees are two entirely different things. The CEO could have been just focused on tech and could have left his political flags in the proverbial closet. Instead he chose to bring them out. Mozilla was already an entity that had made some pretty strong statements about diversity, inclusivity and their view of the open web. If you then stir up a shitstorm you will find you can no longer effectively focus on the tech either. So you can very well pick both: make all those statements, live by them, attract employees who see things likewise and then focus on the tech. But that's a glass house of your own making and if you then start hurling bricks it will have a terrible effect.

erik_seaberg 6y ago
He wasn't CEO during the prop. 8 campaign. I don't think we want everyone in tech permanently abstaining from politics just in case there might be a leadership role years later.
- jacquesm 6y ago
  It was close enough that it mattered, four years to be precise. If it had been decades ago it likely would have been a different matter. Dutch proverb: High trees catch a lot of wind. If you become a high tree, in politics or as a CEO then your past will come under scrutiny, and what is found there may very well have a direct effect on your present day life.
  - FeepingCreature 6y ago
    > It was close enough that it mattered, four years to be precise. If it had been decades ago it likely would have been a different matter. I highly doubt that.
  - kasabali 6y ago
    2014-2008=6 It's "close enough" only because you're trying to save face from your incorrect implication/claim you've repeated several times across different comments in this thread that he was the CEO when he did the donation.
    - jcranmer 6y ago
      It's also worth pointing out that public opinion has swung decisively and dramatically in that intervening time period--at least 20 percentage points IIRC.
    - jacquesm 6y ago
      2014-2010 = 4. It's close enough because right up until his apology Eich did not indicate in any way shape or form that he had changed his views on this. Only after it all blew up did he come with his apology. Sure, he wasn't CEO at the time he made his donation but when he stepped forward to become CEO he was well aware of his own position regarding this and knew that to effectively lead Mozilla would be impossible given his - apparently strongly held - views. At least, I'm assuming people do not donate to political causes they do not feel strongly about.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]