8 ms·

Three Mozilla Board Members Resign over Choice of New CEO

163 points by tweakz 13y ago

yuhong 13y ago
"They did not want to be identified because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the matter." With Mozilla?
- kelnos 13y ago
  The "people familiar" with the matter (who presumably work for or are affiliated with Mozilla in some way) aren't authorized by Mozilla to speak publicly about the board member resignations.
  - yuhong 13y ago
    I know, why do they need authorization at an organization like Mozilla?
    - kelnos 13y ago
      Just because Mozilla has a culture of openness and transparency, it doesn't mean every piece of information about the goings-on of the company is public. I find that unsurprising and entirely normal.
      - yuhong 13y ago
        Yes, but I wonder exactly why in this particular case.
        kelnos 13y ago
        I'm not particularly surprised. Details about board member resignations are often fairly sensitive. Agreed that it'd be nice to know the details, though.
rdl 13y ago
I agree that mobile is critical to remaining relevant (along with security), two areas where Mozilla/Firefox have been pretty subpar. I don't think Eich has specific security or mobile expertise, but he is quite technical, which is a big improvement over a lot of potential CEOs, and I think a technical CEO is likely to prioritize security and mobile. (The whole "donate to prop 8" thing is a red herring; Mozilla needs someone who is excellent at the things Mozilla most needs (hire for strength) vs. the absence of any weaknesses (politically incorrect donations); it's possible Eich doesn't have the right strengths.) Is Mozilla not capable of attracting really top-tier people for senior leadership due to lack of an equity upside, or culture, or something else? I realize the pool is pretty small, but there are people with either mobile or security leadership experience who would probably take the job.
- fidotron 13y ago
  I think support for Rust and Servo shows there is recognition on the security front, and also that attempting to brute force it through people power won't work for them. On mobile, I think there's a relative handful of candidates, and they're either gainfully employed or burned out. I've been in the mobile world for a decade and the people I know are jumping into "miscellaneous devices with a cellular connection" at quite a rate. My contention is Mozilla are too conservative, and can't accept the smartphone war is lost already. There are related markets for which their system could work very well though, such as e-readers.
- snogglethorpe 13y ago
  > mobile is critical to remaining relevant (along with security), two areas where Mozilla/Firefox have been pretty subpar "Subpar"? I've used FF on my Android phone for quite a while, and find it nicer than chrome... [I still try chrome occasionally, "just in case", but always end up ditching it and sticking with FF.]
jholly 13y ago
Locked out of iOS. Under heavly competition on Android. Put the metro port on the back burner. Increasingly fighting to stay on feature parity with Chrome on the desktop. FirefoxOS still to make an impact. I love Firefox. I'm just worried for it. With the world going mobile, I wonder if there's space for Firefox. It would be such a shame not to see it around 5 years from now. I wonder if it makes sense for a small organization to spend so much time and money on a custom rendering engine. Is it such a horrible idea to fork and contribute to blink? Just thinking out loud. Mostly out of despair.
- magicalist 13y ago
  > Is it such a horrible idea to fork and contribute to blink? Just thinking out loud A fairly bad one, yes. There would be virtually no benefit to doing this, and a serious detriment to web browser diversity (which would likely be a detriment to the health of the web as a developing ecosystem). > It would be such a shame not to see it around 5 years from now They still have plenty of revenue, and the amount still keeps going up every time they renegotiate their search engine contracts. They'd be more in danger of irrelevance, but while they had a slight dip in browser marketshare (depending on who you ask), it seems relatively steady state now (just like their major competitors). Meanwhile no one is wringing their hands over Microsoft's irrelevance in the browser market even though Windows Phone remains a tiny contender. Your worries seem a little unfounded.
  - justinreeves 13y ago
    jholly's post reads like a concern troll.
  - jholly 13y ago
    Microsoft isn't a fair comparison. They have other, multi-billion dollar cash cows to rely on. I don't think they're unfounded. Nearly every developer I know uses chrome, and chrome dev tools. This wasn't always the case. Market share can be a lagging indicator, i think it's a little short sighted to suggest they're okay. They're not! Forking isn't a sin. Diversity often a result of forking. Take a look at this graphic[1]. There's a good chance the browser you're currently using is a result of a fork. Mozilla has to really examine what they stand for. The open web doesn't depend on implementation internals. Just specs, tests, and sensible governing body, and a set of willing participants that don't have unreasonable misaligned interests. They can still promote an open. Perhaps even do a better job of it with the extra resources. [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Timeline_of_web_browsers.svg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Timeline_...
jwise0 13y ago
This seems unusual. Isn't the board responsible for appointing the CEO, to begin with? How can it be that half the board resigns after their own CEO appointment? Even if the appointment were simply a majority of the board, that in and of itself raises bizarre questions. Why is a CEO appointed only on a 3-3 (or 4-2) vote? Usually you would want unanimity in important things like this. This certainly opens up a lot of questions.
- voidlogic 13y ago
  Mozilla bylaws doesn't seem to state the the mechanics of officer appointment- just that they do it? https://static.mozilla.com/foundation/documents/mf-bylaws.pdf https://static.mozilla.com/foundation/documents/mf-bylaws.pd...
  - heycam 13y ago
    The bylaws of the Corporation are more relevant: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/legal/bylaws.html http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/legal/bylaws.html
- petercooper 13y ago
  the people familiar with the situation said. They did not want to be identified because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the matter. I'm going to be simultaneously cynical and optimistic here, but the story so far appears to be based on anonymous hearsay. Eich's appointment could perhaps be a smaller part of a big shakeup at Mozilla, board and all, that isn't predicated entirely on Eich. Alternatively, and perhaps most realistically, the board members who voted for Eich may not have considered it a problem until they saw the backlash, both internally and externally. Both people and organizations alike can backtrack and develop new ideals based upon the reactions to their actions. While we're doing hearsay though, I've heard no new CTO is on the cards which strikes me as odd. Edit: I don't know how legit this is, but I just saw this on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TruthTellerMoz1/status/449673366208012288 https://twitter.com/TruthTellerMoz1/status/44967336620801228...
  - 13y ago
the_ancient 13y ago
So is a Fork coming?
untog 13y ago
The choice of Eich as a CEO also made me wonder - they took a year to find a CEO, and ended up with their own CTO. Is it fair to assume that they searched long and hard but couldn't find anyone? If so, that's a real shame. I want Mozilla to succeed.
- davidgerard 13y ago
  To be fair, Eich lives and breathes Mozilla and the mission, and is basically the perfect choice for CEO ... except for his political actions being so toxic to the brand that other nonprofits issue a press release to say they're boycotting Firefox over it: http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/victoria/vac-gmhc-to-boycott-mozilla-13422.html http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/victoria/vac-gmhc-to-boyco...
  - snogglethorpe 13y ago
    Does a (relatively small) monetary donation really deserve to be called a "toxic political action"...?
    - meritt 13y ago
      Has he defended his support of a blatantly anti-gay measure? You cannot support hate groups and expect the world to just brush it off. Edit - Found his response: https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - CamperBob2 13y ago
      I'm guessing you're not one of the people being discriminated against by Proposition 8. Am I right?
      - snogglethorpe 13y ago
        You are correct, although I disagree(d) strongly with Proposition 8....
zobzu 13y ago
Err, I don't think their leave is related to Eich being CEO. I'm not sure even knew about the "scandal" before they left.
- midnightaz 13y ago
  Actually, the article implies that they resigned over picking an inside candidate instead of an outside one, not over the gay marriage issue. This would also explain why Mozilla seemed so unprepared for the criticism on Prop8: they'd just fought a huge battle over whether the CEO should be from inside or outside Mozilla, and that was probably all they focused on if it was so big that half the board resigned.
  - zobzu 13y ago
    I think you may be right. :)
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
mjn 13y ago
Have they already appointed replacements? The Mozilla page listing the board members doesn't list any of these three people as board members, and instead lists these 6 people as comprising the board: Mitchell Baker, Brian Behlendorf, Brendan Eich, Joi Ito, Bob Lisbonne, Cathy Davidson (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/about/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/about/).
- heycam 13y ago
  That's the Foundation. The three current Corporation board members are listed here: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/
  - mjn 13y ago
    Ah ok, that makes sense. The article was a bit confusing because it keeps talking about the Mozilla board, which in an unqualified sense to me implies the top-level board controlling the entire Mozilla organization. Whereas they seem to mean the board in charge of its main revenue-producing subsidiary... which is important, but not the board ultimately in charge. I realize "not ultimately in charge" doesn't necessarily mean "doesn't exercise practical power", but the real top-level Mozilla board could ultimately choose to replace them if it were sufficiently unhappy with the state of things, so I don't see this board as The Mozilla Board, in the sense of the people who are responsible for stewarding my donations and ensuring that the charitable mission is met.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
dewitt 13y ago
Off-topic, but that's a weird statement from the WSJ: "Firefox is the world’s second-most-popular Web browser on personal computers, with 18% market share, according to Net Applications, a web-analytics consulting firm. That trails Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, with 58% share, and just ahead of Google’s Chrome, with 17% share." Here's what I found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers: Chrome IE Firefox Safari StatCounter 46.60% 24.64% 20.37% 5.06% W3Counter 34.1% 20.3% 18.3% 17.8% Wikimedia 42.69% 18.02% 15.28% 6.06% Of all the places you could pull browser share numbers, I didn't think any were still reporting IE with a usage lead anymore. And the interesting browser growth today, of course, is all mobile. (So those outgoing board members were right in several ways.)
- yulaow 13y ago
  I don't know why but I saw almost in each famous information site ever using only Net Applications to evaluate the market share of browser. Does it have some sort of better precision rate over the others? It seems strange
  - bzbarsky 13y ago
    Net applications is the only major browser market share source that tries to provide _user_ share, not visit share. Consider three people: one uses browser X and visits Wikipedia twice a day. One uses browser Y and visits three times a day. One uses browser Z and visits once a day. If you count share amongst users, the three shares are equal. If you count share amongst visits to Wikipedia, you get 50% Y, 33% X, 17% Z. This same problem comes up if you count visits over a variety of sites too. Some biases cancel out (e.g. the sort you'd get if you measured just Huffington Post vs just Fox News), but biases that have to do with some people just browsing _more_ than others in an absolute sense are not. Of course both numbers, visits and users, are useful information. They just mean different things.
- JohnTHaller 13y ago
  Net Applications numbers are far more accurate than the 3 in the table above.
blisterpeanuts 13y ago
This article links to an earlier WSJ piece that gives more information about Eich's background (http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/03/24/mozilla-picks-insider-eich-as-new-ceo/ http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/03/24/mozilla-picks-insider...). He invented Javascript in 1995, co-founded Mozilla, and helped start Firefox. It seems to me he's very well qualified from a historical as well as technical perspective. Questions about his mobile expertise seem misplaced, considering that his technical contributions helped pave the way for mobile web apps. The article suggests that the unhappiness about Eich's appointment stems from his support in 2008 for California's Proposition 8, which was an anti-gay marriage law that passed but ultimately was overturned by the Supreme Court. I don't wish to incite a flame war over this or start a debate over gay/same sex marriage; I merely question why his views on this particular issue make the man unfit for the job. Would it be better if he had contributed money to fight Prop 8? I find this kind of litmus test highly disturbing.
- camus2 13y ago
  > Questions about his mobile expertise seem misplaced, > considering that his technical contributions helped > pave the way for mobile web apps. How ? Apple in my opinion was the most influential actor regarding the development of mobile apps.The first HTML touch specific api came from apple... Apple defined what modern mobile apps means.
  - untog 13y ago
    He did say mobile web apps, not mobile apps. And given that almost all webapps run on JavaScript...
    - camus2 13y ago
      >The first HTML touch api came from apple... I did imply mobile web apps and javascript is not a plateform,it's a language. What you imply is as stupid as implying "X who created Assembly helped pave the way for mobile web apps."...sure... So Eich paved the way for Photoshop or Fireworks because they both run javascript? yeah right.
desireco42 13y ago
This is stupid, he might not be the most charismatic leaders but he is genuine leader for organization like Mozilla, and other causes what he supports in his free time, I personally don't care, as it is not relevant.
- desireco42 13y ago
  And you who downvote should go out of the closet, it is not everything about gay rights, there is life beyond that
  - jbeja 13y ago
    "there is life beyond that", yeah and i would love to live it with the same rights as you. Cheers
    - desireco42 13y ago
      and this is excellent example of tolerance you desire :)
      - wpietri 13y ago
        That is horseshit. When somebody works to take away your civil rights, a desire for tolerance does not require you to politely say, "Oh, gosh, you go on ahead and oppress us then." An open mind isn't an empty mind.
        desireco42 13y ago
        How is a guy who created javascript singlehandedly that powers the web working to take away your freedom :)
        jbeja 13y ago
        Yeah, the language that doesn't know how to treat equality properly, how ironic.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
sinak 13y ago
Hmm, something's amiss. Archive.org's record of Mozilla's website says that Mozilla Corp only ever had 5 board members. The WSJ seems to imply they had 6. Assuming Moz's own website is accurate, Katharina Borchert only joined around the time Eich was appointed. Either way, the numbers don't quite add up. If there were only 5 board members, and only 2 of them wanted Eich, how did he get chosen? And even if Katherina was already on the board, that's still 3 vs 3. Mozilla is an incredible force for good. Hope they get through this quickly and get back making the web better. Archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20140322233528/http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/ https://web.archive.org/web/20140322233528/http://www.mozill... Present: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/
- yulaow 13y ago
  Could be that (note: this is only a supposition) maybe some who voted for this CEO had not evaluated well the outcome and now part of the board, and maybe in this part there are also some who voted for him, asked him to step back? Maybe he said no and now, in the position to get a bad reputation or to pay for the bad choice, the same board members prefer to step back themselves to avoid to be in the crossfire?
- redler 13y ago
  I don't know anything about Mozilla's structure, but in some corporations it's possible for a single board seat to have more than one vote (e.g., for board seats appointed by a holder of "Class F" (founder) or "original shares" versus other classes of stock). Edit: clarity.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - ics 13y ago
    The last major example we saw around here was the systemd vote for Debian. One member of the committee (bdale) was to have two votes in the event of a tie (though it was not simply a yes/no vote). If an even number of board members are presented with a scenario where a decision A or B must be made and do nothing is not an option, a tie-breaking vote is pretty important.
grannyg00se 13y ago
I see that Eich put up a small amount of money to support a bill against gay marriage. This says nothing about the way he treats people, or how he might serve as CEO. Is there something more, or is it really all about his political ideals?
- jbeja 13y ago
  Just the state that he doesn't believe in equality is enough for me.
  - grannyg00se 13y ago
    The marriage issue is complicated by many factors, one of which is religion. It doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't believe in equality.
    - wpietri 13y ago
      If you work to strip civil rights from a group of people, you pretty much have to not believe in their equality in any meaningful sense. Sure, he might "believe in" their equality in the same way that most people "believe in" getting enough niacin. That is: they might state that belief, but they will never act for it and will often act against it. And I'd add that if Eich believes in their equality and now regrets working against it, he could just say so. That he has energetically dodged the issue when it is of obvious concern to the people he can now fire says something on its own.
  - foolinaround 13y ago
    >he doesn't believe in equality what you mean is "he does'nt believe in the definition of equality as you believe it to be". I believe that he should be penalized if he has demonstrated any hatred towards people in the workplace. I believe that a man is free to exercise his right to free speech in his private life, and this is what I deem it to be. There is a reasonable fear that the gay employees may find themselves cornered under his leadership, and this was addressed in his letter and in the steps Mozilla took to assuage those fears. Anything after this is a witch hunt, and folks taking up the pitchforks are the ones who have been affected the most. Its sad, but happens all the time.
hans 13y ago
never heard of "mozillians" ..
- hans 13y ago
  i guess "mozillans" sounds too much like "villain"
joyeuse6701 13y ago
Headline makes it seem like this is a resignation over a disapproval. The witch hunt is coming and they are getting out of the way. With this resignation they hope to avoid being targets. Similar things happened in Soviet bloc countries with the NKVD. Hell, similar things happened during all that McCarthyism crap... 'So we've heard you've donated to the Communist party several years back... you'd like to keep your job wouldn't you?'
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  "The witch hunt is coming"? You must not have been paying attention over the last couple of days. The bonfire has been stoked, the rope is ready, the judges have made their decision, and the ducks are ready to be weighed. Eich has been found guilty, guilty, guilty in the court of public opinion: his offense is having the same opinion as 52.2% of Californian voters in 2008 and donating to that cause. No apology is apparently sufficient, so he must be destroyed. At least, that's sure what it looks like online.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
javajosh 13y ago
This reminds me of how Clinton was impeached for lying about getting a blowjob, but Bush wasn't anywhere close to being impeached over misleading us into war. Supporting Prop 8 is Eich's personal Lewinski; let's save our vitriol for something important. Eich's made it clear that his professional stance supports total equality in the workplace, so unless he starts firing gay people, let's give him a shot. As for the board members resigning, it's not a good sign to see an internal rift like this, but really, only insiders really know what's going on. Speculation isn't helping.
sgy 13y ago
Half the board is resigning
pdkl95 13y ago
While I have zero actual proof, I have a nagging worry that is probably worth brining up. This is entirely supposition and speculation, and I welcome hard evidence on the subject regardless of which way it points.. Right now we find ourselves watching vital cornerstone of the Free Internet suddenly ripping itself apart. A community of people who would usually be working on improving (at least attempting to improve) concepts like freedom of speech and publication (press). This is especially important right now, given all of the NSA/Snowden drama of the last year, and the threats they revealed. So I'm forced to wonder: who's the spy trying to wedge the community apart? Yes, yes, we've been arguing about sexuality and marriage for a long time, and it should simply be old factions suddenly forced to confront their current situation. Normally, I would simply accept that explanation. However, given that the spy agencies have been using[1] tactics to disrupt groups they see as threatening, I'm forced to wonder if these new "wedges" between previously-stable communities. Especially in the cases like Mozilla, where and its role on the world stage certainly makes them a target for COINTELPRO or similar attacks. ... Because of this worry, I'm going to suggest something counter to my usual instincts. Being gay myself, I would normally be strongly against Mr. Eich for reasons already said elsewhere. There is a wisdom in picking your battles, and right now there are more important issues. So, instead, I am choosing to see Mr. Eich as a strong ally against greater threats. Marriage rights won't easy to fight for if we lose the surveillance/police-state battle first. Emotions are running strong right now - I won't deny that the idea of having funded prop 8 does piss me of - but winning one war often means finding allies, even if you don't like them. edit: forgot footnote [1]: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipula...
xrctl 13y ago
Good, a necessary pruning from the board of people who are more interested in politics than product.
tungwaiyip 13y ago
I am disappointed about Eich's support of prop 8 and disagree with his view. But what is truly appalling is his critics pushing for ousting him base on his view. Isn't people allowed to have different value? This is not even a fringe idea. Majority of votes has voted for prop 8. What is the moral to deny people the job base on their political believe? What sort of world are you really suggesting? Add a background check to bar 52% of voters who has support prop 8 from employment? This is far more chilling than prop 8 itself. People need to speak up and stop this insanity about ousting Eich. This include the LGBT community and their supporters. Yesterday their were fighting for inclusiveness and accepting people with different values. They need to walk the talk themselves, even if it means to tolerate people whose value they disagree with.

163 points by tweakz 13y ago

yuhong 13y ago

"They did not want to be identified because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the matter." With Mozilla?

kelnos 13y ago
The "people familiar" with the matter (who presumably work for or are affiliated with Mozilla in some way) aren't authorized by Mozilla to speak publicly about the board member resignations.
- yuhong 13y ago
  I know, why do they need authorization at an organization like Mozilla?
  - kelnos 13y ago
    Just because Mozilla has a culture of openness and transparency, it doesn't mean every piece of information about the goings-on of the company is public. I find that unsurprising and entirely normal.
    - yuhong 13y ago
      Yes, but I wonder exactly why in this particular case.
      - kelnos 13y ago
        I'm not particularly surprised. Details about board member resignations are often fairly sensitive. Agreed that it'd be nice to know the details, though.

rdl 13y ago

I agree that mobile is critical to remaining relevant (along with security), two areas where Mozilla/Firefox have been pretty subpar. I don't think Eich has specific security or mobile expertise, but he is quite technical, which is a big improvement over a lot of potential CEOs, and I think a technical CEO is likely to prioritize security and mobile. (The whole "donate to prop 8" thing is a red herring; Mozilla needs someone who is excellent at the things Mozilla most needs (hire for strength) vs. the absence of any weaknesses (politically incorrect donations); it's possible Eich doesn't have the right strengths.) Is Mozilla not capable of attracting really top-tier people for senior leadership due to lack of an equity upside, or culture, or something else? I realize the pool is pretty small, but there are people with either mobile or security leadership experience who would probably take the job.

fidotron 13y ago
I think support for Rust and Servo shows there is recognition on the security front, and also that attempting to brute force it through people power won't work for them. On mobile, I think there's a relative handful of candidates, and they're either gainfully employed or burned out. I've been in the mobile world for a decade and the people I know are jumping into "miscellaneous devices with a cellular connection" at quite a rate. My contention is Mozilla are too conservative, and can't accept the smartphone war is lost already. There are related markets for which their system could work very well though, such as e-readers.
snogglethorpe 13y ago
> mobile is critical to remaining relevant (along with security), two areas where Mozilla/Firefox have been pretty subpar "Subpar"? I've used FF on my Android phone for quite a while, and find it nicer than chrome... [I still try chrome occasionally, "just in case", but always end up ditching it and sticking with FF.]

jholly 13y ago

Locked out of iOS. Under heavly competition on Android. Put the metro port on the back burner. Increasingly fighting to stay on feature parity with Chrome on the desktop. FirefoxOS still to make an impact. I love Firefox. I'm just worried for it. With the world going mobile, I wonder if there's space for Firefox. It would be such a shame not to see it around 5 years from now. I wonder if it makes sense for a small organization to spend so much time and money on a custom rendering engine. Is it such a horrible idea to fork and contribute to blink? Just thinking out loud. Mostly out of despair.

magicalist 13y ago
> Is it such a horrible idea to fork and contribute to blink? Just thinking out loud A fairly bad one, yes. There would be virtually no benefit to doing this, and a serious detriment to web browser diversity (which would likely be a detriment to the health of the web as a developing ecosystem). > It would be such a shame not to see it around 5 years from now They still have plenty of revenue, and the amount still keeps going up every time they renegotiate their search engine contracts. They'd be more in danger of irrelevance, but while they had a slight dip in browser marketshare (depending on who you ask), it seems relatively steady state now (just like their major competitors). Meanwhile no one is wringing their hands over Microsoft's irrelevance in the browser market even though Windows Phone remains a tiny contender. Your worries seem a little unfounded.
- justinreeves 13y ago
  jholly's post reads like a concern troll.
- jholly 13y ago
  Microsoft isn't a fair comparison. They have other, multi-billion dollar cash cows to rely on. I don't think they're unfounded. Nearly every developer I know uses chrome, and chrome dev tools. This wasn't always the case. Market share can be a lagging indicator, i think it's a little short sighted to suggest they're okay. They're not! Forking isn't a sin. Diversity often a result of forking. Take a look at this graphic[1]. There's a good chance the browser you're currently using is a result of a fork. Mozilla has to really examine what they stand for. The open web doesn't depend on implementation internals. Just specs, tests, and sensible governing body, and a set of willing participants that don't have unreasonable misaligned interests. They can still promote an open. Perhaps even do a better job of it with the extra resources. [1] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Timeline_of_web_browsers.svg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Timeline_...

jwise0 13y ago

This seems unusual. Isn't the board responsible for appointing the CEO, to begin with? How can it be that half the board resigns after their own CEO appointment? Even if the appointment were simply a majority of the board, that in and of itself raises bizarre questions. Why is a CEO appointed only on a 3-3 (or 4-2) vote? Usually you would want unanimity in important things like this. This certainly opens up a lot of questions.

voidlogic 13y ago
Mozilla bylaws doesn't seem to state the the mechanics of officer appointment- just that they do it? https://static.mozilla.com/foundation/documents/mf-bylaws.pdf https://static.mozilla.com/foundation/documents/mf-bylaws.pd...
- heycam 13y ago
  The bylaws of the Corporation are more relevant: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/legal/bylaws.html http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/legal/bylaws.html
petercooper 13y ago
the people familiar with the situation said. They did not want to be identified because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the matter. I'm going to be simultaneously cynical and optimistic here, but the story so far appears to be based on anonymous hearsay. Eich's appointment could perhaps be a smaller part of a big shakeup at Mozilla, board and all, that isn't predicated entirely on Eich. Alternatively, and perhaps most realistically, the board members who voted for Eich may not have considered it a problem until they saw the backlash, both internally and externally. Both people and organizations alike can backtrack and develop new ideals based upon the reactions to their actions. While we're doing hearsay though, I've heard no new CTO is on the cards which strikes me as odd. Edit: I don't know how legit this is, but I just saw this on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TruthTellerMoz1/status/449673366208012288 https://twitter.com/TruthTellerMoz1/status/44967336620801228...
- 13y ago

the_ancient 13y ago

So is a Fork coming?

untog 13y ago

The choice of Eich as a CEO also made me wonder - they took a year to find a CEO, and ended up with their own CTO. Is it fair to assume that they searched long and hard but couldn't find anyone? If so, that's a real shame. I want Mozilla to succeed.

davidgerard 13y ago
To be fair, Eich lives and breathes Mozilla and the mission, and is basically the perfect choice for CEO ... except for his political actions being so toxic to the brand that other nonprofits issue a press release to say they're boycotting Firefox over it: http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/victoria/vac-gmhc-to-boycott-mozilla-13422.html http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/victoria/vac-gmhc-to-boyco...
- snogglethorpe 13y ago
  Does a (relatively small) monetary donation really deserve to be called a "toxic political action"...?
  - meritt 13y ago
    Has he defended his support of a blatantly anti-gay measure? You cannot support hate groups and expect the world to just brush it off. Edit - Found his response: https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
    I'm guessing you're not one of the people being discriminated against by Proposition 8. Am I right?
    - snogglethorpe 13y ago
      You are correct, although I disagree(d) strongly with Proposition 8....

zobzu 13y ago

Err, I don't think their leave is related to Eich being CEO. I'm not sure even knew about the "scandal" before they left.

midnightaz 13y ago
Actually, the article implies that they resigned over picking an inside candidate instead of an outside one, not over the gay marriage issue. This would also explain why Mozilla seemed so unprepared for the criticism on Prop8: they'd just fought a huge battle over whether the CEO should be from inside or outside Mozilla, and that was probably all they focused on if it was so big that half the board resigned.
- zobzu 13y ago
  I think you may be right. :)

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

mjn 13y ago

Have they already appointed replacements? The Mozilla page listing the board members doesn't list any of these three people as board members, and instead lists these 6 people as comprising the board: Mitchell Baker, Brian Behlendorf, Brendan Eich, Joi Ito, Bob Lisbonne, Cathy Davidson (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/about/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/about/).

heycam 13y ago
That's the Foundation. The three current Corporation board members are listed here: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/
- mjn 13y ago
  Ah ok, that makes sense. The article was a bit confusing because it keeps talking about the Mozilla board, which in an unqualified sense to me implies the top-level board controlling the entire Mozilla organization. Whereas they seem to mean the board in charge of its main revenue-producing subsidiary... which is important, but not the board ultimately in charge. I realize "not ultimately in charge" doesn't necessarily mean "doesn't exercise practical power", but the real top-level Mozilla board could ultimately choose to replace them if it were sufficiently unhappy with the state of things, so I don't see this board as The Mozilla Board, in the sense of the people who are responsible for stewarding my donations and ensuring that the charitable mission is met.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

dewitt 13y ago

Off-topic, but that's a weird statement from the WSJ: "Firefox is the world’s second-most-popular Web browser on personal computers, with 18% market share, according to Net Applications, a web-analytics consulting firm. That trails Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, with 58% share, and just ahead of Google’s Chrome, with 17% share." Here's what I found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers: Chrome IE Firefox Safari StatCounter 46.60% 24.64% 20.37% 5.06% W3Counter 34.1% 20.3% 18.3% 17.8% Wikimedia 42.69% 18.02% 15.28% 6.06% Of all the places you could pull browser share numbers, I didn't think any were still reporting IE with a usage lead anymore. And the interesting browser growth today, of course, is all mobile. (So those outgoing board members were right in several ways.)

yulaow 13y ago
I don't know why but I saw almost in each famous information site ever using only Net Applications to evaluate the market share of browser. Does it have some sort of better precision rate over the others? It seems strange
- bzbarsky 13y ago
  Net applications is the only major browser market share source that tries to provide _user_ share, not visit share. Consider three people: one uses browser X and visits Wikipedia twice a day. One uses browser Y and visits three times a day. One uses browser Z and visits once a day. If you count share amongst users, the three shares are equal. If you count share amongst visits to Wikipedia, you get 50% Y, 33% X, 17% Z. This same problem comes up if you count visits over a variety of sites too. Some biases cancel out (e.g. the sort you'd get if you measured just Huffington Post vs just Fox News), but biases that have to do with some people just browsing _more_ than others in an absolute sense are not. Of course both numbers, visits and users, are useful information. They just mean different things.
JohnTHaller 13y ago
Net Applications numbers are far more accurate than the 3 in the table above.

blisterpeanuts 13y ago

This article links to an earlier WSJ piece that gives more information about Eich's background (http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/03/24/mozilla-picks-insider-eich-as-new-ceo/ http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/03/24/mozilla-picks-insider...). He invented Javascript in 1995, co-founded Mozilla, and helped start Firefox. It seems to me he's very well qualified from a historical as well as technical perspective. Questions about his mobile expertise seem misplaced, considering that his technical contributions helped pave the way for mobile web apps. The article suggests that the unhappiness about Eich's appointment stems from his support in 2008 for California's Proposition 8, which was an anti-gay marriage law that passed but ultimately was overturned by the Supreme Court. I don't wish to incite a flame war over this or start a debate over gay/same sex marriage; I merely question why his views on this particular issue make the man unfit for the job. Would it be better if he had contributed money to fight Prop 8? I find this kind of litmus test highly disturbing.

camus2 13y ago
> Questions about his mobile expertise seem misplaced, > considering that his technical contributions helped > pave the way for mobile web apps. How ? Apple in my opinion was the most influential actor regarding the development of mobile apps.The first HTML touch specific api came from apple... Apple defined what modern mobile apps means.
- untog 13y ago
  He did say mobile web apps, not mobile apps. And given that almost all webapps run on JavaScript...
  - camus2 13y ago
    >The first HTML touch api came from apple... I did imply mobile web apps and javascript is not a plateform,it's a language. What you imply is as stupid as implying "X who created Assembly helped pave the way for mobile web apps."...sure... So Eich paved the way for Photoshop or Fireworks because they both run javascript? yeah right.

desireco42 13y ago

This is stupid, he might not be the most charismatic leaders but he is genuine leader for organization like Mozilla, and other causes what he supports in his free time, I personally don't care, as it is not relevant.

desireco42 13y ago
And you who downvote should go out of the closet, it is not everything about gay rights, there is life beyond that
- jbeja 13y ago
  "there is life beyond that", yeah and i would love to live it with the same rights as you. Cheers
  - desireco42 13y ago
    and this is excellent example of tolerance you desire :)
    - wpietri 13y ago
      That is horseshit. When somebody works to take away your civil rights, a desire for tolerance does not require you to politely say, "Oh, gosh, you go on ahead and oppress us then." An open mind isn't an empty mind.
      - desireco42 13y ago
        How is a guy who created javascript singlehandedly that powers the web working to take away your freedom :)
        jbeja 13y ago
        Yeah, the language that doesn't know how to treat equality properly, how ironic.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

sinak 13y ago

Hmm, something's amiss. Archive.org's record of Mozilla's website says that Mozilla Corp only ever had 5 board members. The WSJ seems to imply they had 6. Assuming Moz's own website is accurate, Katharina Borchert only joined around the time Eich was appointed. Either way, the numbers don't quite add up. If there were only 5 board members, and only 2 of them wanted Eich, how did he get chosen? And even if Katherina was already on the board, that's still 3 vs 3. Mozilla is an incredible force for good. Hope they get through this quickly and get back making the web better. Archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20140322233528/http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/ https://web.archive.org/web/20140322233528/http://www.mozill... Present: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/moco/

yulaow 13y ago
Could be that (note: this is only a supposition) maybe some who voted for this CEO had not evaluated well the outcome and now part of the board, and maybe in this part there are also some who voted for him, asked him to step back? Maybe he said no and now, in the position to get a bad reputation or to pay for the bad choice, the same board members prefer to step back themselves to avoid to be in the crossfire?
redler 13y ago
I don't know anything about Mozilla's structure, but in some corporations it's possible for a single board seat to have more than one vote (e.g., for board seats appointed by a holder of "Class F" (founder) or "original shares" versus other classes of stock). Edit: clarity.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ics 13y ago
  The last major example we saw around here was the systemd vote for Debian. One member of the committee (bdale) was to have two votes in the event of a tie (though it was not simply a yes/no vote). If an even number of board members are presented with a scenario where a decision A or B must be made and do nothing is not an option, a tie-breaking vote is pretty important.

grannyg00se 13y ago

I see that Eich put up a small amount of money to support a bill against gay marriage. This says nothing about the way he treats people, or how he might serve as CEO. Is there something more, or is it really all about his political ideals?

jbeja 13y ago
Just the state that he doesn't believe in equality is enough for me.
- grannyg00se 13y ago
  The marriage issue is complicated by many factors, one of which is religion. It doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't believe in equality.
  - wpietri 13y ago
    If you work to strip civil rights from a group of people, you pretty much have to not believe in their equality in any meaningful sense. Sure, he might "believe in" their equality in the same way that most people "believe in" getting enough niacin. That is: they might state that belief, but they will never act for it and will often act against it. And I'd add that if Eich believes in their equality and now regrets working against it, he could just say so. That he has energetically dodged the issue when it is of obvious concern to the people he can now fire says something on its own.
- foolinaround 13y ago
  >he doesn't believe in equality what you mean is "he does'nt believe in the definition of equality as you believe it to be". I believe that he should be penalized if he has demonstrated any hatred towards people in the workplace. I believe that a man is free to exercise his right to free speech in his private life, and this is what I deem it to be. There is a reasonable fear that the gay employees may find themselves cornered under his leadership, and this was addressed in his letter and in the steps Mozilla took to assuage those fears. Anything after this is a witch hunt, and folks taking up the pitchforks are the ones who have been affected the most. Its sad, but happens all the time.

hans 13y ago

never heard of "mozillians" ..

hans 13y ago
i guess "mozillans" sounds too much like "villain"

joyeuse6701 13y ago

Headline makes it seem like this is a resignation over a disapproval. The witch hunt is coming and they are getting out of the way. With this resignation they hope to avoid being targets. Similar things happened in Soviet bloc countries with the NKVD. Hell, similar things happened during all that McCarthyism crap... 'So we've heard you've donated to the Communist party several years back... you'd like to keep your job wouldn't you?'

MrZongle2 13y ago
"The witch hunt is coming"? You must not have been paying attention over the last couple of days. The bonfire has been stoked, the rope is ready, the judges have made their decision, and the ducks are ready to be weighed. Eich has been found guilty, guilty, guilty in the court of public opinion: his offense is having the same opinion as 52.2% of Californian voters in 2008 and donating to that cause. No apology is apparently sufficient, so he must be destroyed. At least, that's sure what it looks like online.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

javajosh 13y ago

This reminds me of how Clinton was impeached for lying about getting a blowjob, but Bush wasn't anywhere close to being impeached over misleading us into war. Supporting Prop 8 is Eich's personal Lewinski; let's save our vitriol for something important. Eich's made it clear that his professional stance supports total equality in the workplace, so unless he starts firing gay people, let's give him a shot. As for the board members resigning, it's not a good sign to see an internal rift like this, but really, only insiders really know what's going on. Speculation isn't helping.

sgy 13y ago

Half the board is resigning

pdkl95 13y ago

While I have zero actual proof, I have a nagging worry that is probably worth brining up. This is entirely supposition and speculation, and I welcome hard evidence on the subject regardless of which way it points.. Right now we find ourselves watching vital cornerstone of the Free Internet suddenly ripping itself apart. A community of people who would usually be working on improving (at least attempting to improve) concepts like freedom of speech and publication (press). This is especially important right now, given all of the NSA/Snowden drama of the last year, and the threats they revealed. So I'm forced to wonder: who's the spy trying to wedge the community apart? Yes, yes, we've been arguing about sexuality and marriage for a long time, and it should simply be old factions suddenly forced to confront their current situation. Normally, I would simply accept that explanation. However, given that the spy agencies have been using[1] tactics to disrupt groups they see as threatening, I'm forced to wonder if these new "wedges" between previously-stable communities. Especially in the cases like Mozilla, where and its role on the world stage certainly makes them a target for COINTELPRO or similar attacks. ... Because of this worry, I'm going to suggest something counter to my usual instincts. Being gay myself, I would normally be strongly against Mr. Eich for reasons already said elsewhere. There is a wisdom in picking your battles, and right now there are more important issues. So, instead, I am choosing to see Mr. Eich as a strong ally against greater threats. Marriage rights won't easy to fight for if we lose the surveillance/police-state battle first. Emotions are running strong right now - I won't deny that the idea of having funded prop 8 does piss me of - but winning one war often means finding allies, even if you don't like them. edit: forgot footnote [1]: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipula...

xrctl 13y ago

Good, a necessary pruning from the board of people who are more interested in politics than product.

tungwaiyip 13y ago

I am disappointed about Eich's support of prop 8 and disagree with his view. But what is truly appalling is his critics pushing for ousting him base on his view. Isn't people allowed to have different value? This is not even a fringe idea. Majority of votes has voted for prop 8. What is the moral to deny people the job base on their political believe? What sort of world are you really suggesting? Add a background check to bar 52% of voters who has support prop 8 from employment? This is far more chilling than prop 8 itself. People need to speak up and stop this insanity about ousting Eich. This include the LGBT community and their supporters. Yesterday their were fighting for inclusiveness and accepting people with different values. They need to walk the talk themselves, even if it means to tolerate people whose value they disagree with.