58 ms·

Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

• brucelee123 13y ago
  So, are we going to stop using JavaScript now?
• JeremyMorgan 13y ago
  So, now that's done. Are we boycotting JavaScript now?
  • stinksys 13y ago
    I, for one, will never use JS for the rest of my career.
  • byuu 13y ago
    If he becomes the new CEO of the Javascript Corporation, possibly. There weren't boycott calls when Eich was CTO of Mozilla.
• ra88it 13y ago
  Mozilla won't even summarize what happened. They don't appear any "truer to themselves" now than they did last week. Didn't move fast enough to engage with people? What does that even mean? What would they have done if they had been true to themselves? As far as I can tell, there still has only been a single action taken: Eich chose to step down.
• mkr-hn 13y ago
  It's sad that people calling for his head screamed louder than people asking politely for clarification. I just wanted to know why a company that says it's pro-equality hired as CEO someone who donated to an anti-equality campaign. The action was inconsistent with the claim. A lot of people changed their minds in the years after 2008, so I was ready to believe he changed his.
  • stephen_g 13y ago
    > I just wanted to know why a company that says it's pro-equality hired as CEO someone who donated to an anti-equality campaign. Clearly because it hadn't affected his work or the way he treated any of his colleagues over the many years he worked there, and because he was extremely well qualified for the job?
• tbranyen 13y ago
  This disappoints me, because I wanted to see Brendan overcome this by apologizing, sympathizing, and connecting. From my point of view it seemed like Mozilla had a train wreck of a PR nightmare and for reasons I cannot understand decided to throw in the towel and give up. What was learned? What trust was gained? This was a chance for tackling a large issue in a meaningful way and for whatever reason he didn't try.
  • tbranyen 13y ago
    To expand on my comment, I am woefully uneducated on the entirety of the situation. I was speaking as someone who knows Brendan and his work and wanted to see his appointment resolve positively, not fail.
• waterfowl 13y ago
  As a gay man this makes me sad. Eich gave a relatively small amount of money to a cause that happened to be supported by a majority of voters at the time(disclosure: I am gay, I don't care). For the first ~200 years of America NO ONE supported gay marriage beyond fringe gay groups. 20 years ago a celebrated sitting Democratic president signed DOMA. It was a long time ago and not a lot of money and Eich's (edit: technical)contributions outweigh his political opinions. "Not supporting marriage equality" should not be an "unacceptable" opinion. Why can't we respect people's opinions? How is this any different from railroading a staunch Catholic or Mormon or Muslim out of an organization(because if you say "god told me to feel this way" it turns into a protected class). I'd be delighted to work with him, because I don't tend to work with people on software projects with their political views in mind. It just bums me out when people capitulate to angry mobs, in either direction(just last week an organization capitulated to an anti gay agenda...World Vision, and that made me sad too). Edit again: Why don't all you folks put your money where your mouth is and refactor all of your JS code to dart or something, just so you don't have to be tainted by evil Eich.
• gyardley 13y ago
  While this is a good first step, we're also going to need to boycott JavaScript and the companies that use it until JavaScript is replaced with a non-discriminatory alternative.
  • ronaldx 13y ago
    Ruby on Rails? ;)
    • jarsin 13y ago
      Fu*k You! :)
  • anaphor 13y ago
    Strongly and statically typed languages are way more discriminatory though. The whole idea is to reject a certain class of programs as being illogical, just because of the way they use expressions. Edit: e.g., http://blog.ezyang.com/2012/08/is-haskell-liberal-or-conservative/ http://blog.ezyang.com/2012/08/is-haskell-liberal-or-conserv...
• yawboakye 13y ago
  Really sad about and disappointed in the way the whole internet reacted to Mozilla choice of CEO. To the homophobic it's wrong to be gay and to the gay it's wrong to be homophobic. If we accept LGBTQ as a circuitry of the mind, why don't we treat homophobia the same? And if it's ok to publicly admit to being gay why isn't it the same for homophobic? Where's the tolerance of political views?
  • jacobwil 13y ago
    > If we accept LGBTQ as a circuitry of the mind, why don't we treat homophobia the same? Are you telling me that you think some people are biologically predisposed towards homophobia? Just because people have the right to exercise free speech does not indemnify them from the consequences. Drawing broad strokes about how we should respect people's rights to express opinions while not judging them for those opinions is not practical. It's all shades of gray.
• balls187 13y ago
  I feel like this could have been completely avoided if Brendan Eich said "I'm sorry. I was wrong. I supported a cause that I no longer believe in." Since that was in 2008, and people can change their opinions & beliefs. This assumes of course, he no longer believes that marriage only applies to straight couples.
• wyclif 13y ago
  Gay-Rights McCarthyism Takes Brendan Eich's Scalp http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/brendan-eich-gay-rights-mccarthyism/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/brendan-eich-g...
  • camus2 13y ago
    Gay-Rights McCarthyism : novlang and oxymoron, you folks are used to twisting things to the max... what's next ? pro black neo nazism ?
    • filmgirlcw 13y ago
      I mean, unless we're talking about Roy Cohn. ZING Seriously, I'm in full-agreement, but I try to get in a good Roy Cohn diss any time I can.
• username223 13y ago
  > We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. Oh, Mozilla, you acted exactly like we expected. You spouted some condescending PR BS instead of apologizing for making an unrepentant homophobe your CEO.
• tptacek 13y ago
  Hey, Joe, do you support marriage equality? Of course I do. You know, I'm not sure I believe you. After all, you pretty much have to say that to keep your job.
• PakG1 13y ago
  I'm not going to comment on Brendan Eich or the mob. I want to comment about friendship. Marc Andreesen could have done the politically correct thing and thrown Eich under the bus. He didn't. Whatever Eich is, whatever happens with Eich, whatever the mob is, the thing I get out of this whole thing is that Andreesen is a classy guy. Don't know if that's the biggest lesson I'm supposed to be getting out of this whole situation, but it is what it is. Much respect to Andreesen for being willing to stick his head out in a cool and calm manner. No stoking the fire. No running away from the drama. Just a clear statement that he is able to care about his friends. https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/451800039925374977 https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/451800039925374977
• jackmaney 13y ago
  Good riddance.
• michaelsbradley 13y ago
  I'm saddened by this development... not terribly surprised, but saddened to the point that I got a sick feeling in my stomach when I read the headline. In all seriousness, should this be seen as a kind of warning/signal? That is, if you take the moral teachings of your church seriously enough to act on them in the context of democratic processes and/or public discourse, then you need not aspire to, apply for or expect to hold on to a publicly visible secular job, such as CEO of a corporation.
  • jcromartie 13y ago
    There is no separation. Secular vs. sacred is an artificial divide, because every action has consequences in reality. Mr. Eich here did not simply take seriously some moral warnings, he acted on them in the form of donations to political organizations which worked to enact laws which affect real people's real lives. When your job involves leadership of a large publicly visible organization, you are going to want to be on the right side of history slightly in advance of the people under you. Everybody and everything is connected, and it's not just a matter of your sect vs another. Being at the head of a large organization means having a massive pyramid of people under you, supporting you. That pyramid is composed of an increasingly diverse group of people. It used to be almost entirely white men (imagine IBM or any other major corporation 50 years ago). Now, look at an organization like Mozilla, supported by legions of Internet-connected hackers with a staggeringly diverse range of views on social matters, with one in common: openness and inclusiveness. You cannot expect a stable platform to lead from if an increasing number of the people who support you find your views that repulsive. You almost sound like you think that someone owes this guy a CEO job? He could easily find a leadership position with a group composed of people who could support him based on his views.
    • michaelsbradley 13y ago
      I said nothing about him being owed a job, nor did I mention anything about a separation. In fact, the "everything is connected" principle is exactly what would motivate, say, a serious-minded Catholic to vote, donate and set public example in such a way as to promote the Catholic Church's social and moral doctrines. That is to say, "everything is connected; these aren't just truths for me, but truths and norms that deviated from on large scales will lead to societal decay, proliferation of evil, and everyone will suffer all the more. Therefore I will act, vote and speak publicly so as to see these truths reflected in laws and policies that will affect society around me, in my own time and for generations to come."
• grecy 13y ago
  Good. I hope his career is over and he falls into obscurity. He's just like someone championing segregation a few decades ago. History will not look at him kindly. The world has no place for those that discriminate.
• maratc 13y ago
  The first person to lose his job to homophobo-phobia.
• thrwwwy 13y ago
  One thing that is clear is that any corporate executive who holds an anti-LGBT viewpoint will be destroyed. Eich was made an example of. The ability for internet mobs to create chilling effects could lead to a movement for less transparency for smaller political donations. Where I'm sitting, that wouldn't be a bad thing.
• barking 13y ago
  If it was correct for Brendan Eich to resign, would it be incorrect for any company to now offer Brendan Eich a job?
  • blisterpeanuts 13y ago
    None of the people piously denouncing Brendan Eich as a "homophobe" or trouncer of gay rights would have the courage to face him across a desk and say, "We can't hire you because you supported Prop 8." Instead they will lie and say, "Your skills are not the right fit. Best of luck with your search." Very few people have the courage of their convictions. Eich could have caved and said something like "I've changed my thinking about Prop 8 and I deeply regret supporting it." Instead, he stayed true to his convictions and did the best thing for Mozilla which is clearly an organization he cares deeply about.
    • Dewie 13y ago
      It's just a poor culture fit :)
• scottu1 13y ago
  I wish he'd just weathered it out. If there's a side of this that thinks this is pretty ridiculous, I'm on that side. I'm sure there are a million things that my CEO believes that I don't agree with, but the only thing that matters is that he takes the company in the right direction. Who is there better to lead Mozilla than Eich? The next CEO will be the second best choice or worse. I wonder who would want to step into the middle of this.
• spikels 13y ago
  Also in 2008 "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage." - Barack Obama
  • parfe 13y ago
    Barack Obama's full quote: "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about. Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them." Candidate Obama opposed prop 8 in 2008 and strongly supported civil unions. http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1598407/did-barack-obama-answer-your-question.jhtml http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1598407/did-barack-obama-an...
    • spikels 13y ago
      Sounds more like a politician trying to have it both ways. Prop 8 had nothing to do with civil unions and said almost exactly what 2008 Obama said he believed. Then as the polls changed so did his "beliefs". Just politicians being politicians. Another great example of this behavior is Hillary Clinton who as of 2013 supports same sex marriage but back who 2000 said: "Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman." So obviously everyone against Eich as CEO of Mozilla will be against Hillary for President. Right? Maybe be we should just ignore people's personal views when it comes to their employment. Especially when those views have nothing at all to do with your job as in Eich's case (not the case with Obama or Hillary).
• throwaway54984 13y ago
  I wonder what would have happened if he had an opinion on other sensitive topics, let's say he would have been for making heroine available over the counter just like beer in a supermarket. Would this be too much even for the liberal Mozilla?
• g8oz 13y ago
  In Communist times organizations used to have a commissar figure that monitored people for "incorrect" political opinions. He/she exercised power over people for reasons that had nothing to do with the organization's business. These days apparently the Internet will allow anyone to fill that role.
• programminggeek 13y ago
  "We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public. This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community." The irony is when Brendan Eich shared his belief in public, he was forced out of his job. Yay openness. It's really awesome until someone says or believes in something you don't agree with. Then, get the pitchforks.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• rabino 13y ago
  This is unfortunate. We're accepting that bullying is ok as long the bullied is the one with the unpopular ideas. Pretty sad.
• gum_ina_package 13y ago
  No one should feel victorious or good about the outcome of this thing. An individual, who apparently incredibly qualified and talent enough to lead an org like Mozilla, was forced to step down because of his socio-political views. No allegations of discrimination or misconduct on his part were made, but because he donated $1K to a cause that goes against public opinion he is forced out. What if his alleged opposition towards gay marriage (I say alleged because we don't really know why he donated $1K) was due to religious or moral convictions? As long as he didn't discriminate in the workplace, who's the victim here?
• muyuu 13y ago
  Wow. The bullying of Brendan Eich really makes me question whether I should support Mozilla any longer. And ashamed I have donated in the past. This is pure fascism.
  • wnoise 13y ago
    Fascism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, combined with a regulated economic structure of cooperation between major corporations and the government. This is rather different.
    • muyuu 13y ago
      You are right, this is McCarthyism. I didn't find the right word at the time.
• chollida1 13y ago
  Wow, good for Brendan for putting the company ahead of himself. I didn't notice if it said what Brendan's new role would be. I hope he continues to act as a defacto CTO and that the community will allow him to continue in this role as he's proven that he's more than capable of doing so. This whole ordeal reminds me of the Steve Jobs parable about the janitor and VP. I guess the take away is that a rank and file employee can have what ever political beliefs they want, but once you become the CEO, there are certain beliefs that you just can not have anymore. "Jobs imagines his garbage regularly not being emptied in his office, and when he asks the janitor why, he gets an excuse: The locks have been changed, and the janitor doesn’t have a key. This is an acceptable excuse coming from someone who empties trash bins for a living. The janitor gets to explain why something went wrong. Senior people do not. “When you’re the janitor,” Jobs has repeatedly told incoming VPs, “reasons matter.” He continues: “Somewhere between the janitor and the CEO, reasons stop mattering.” That “Rubicon,” he has said, “is crossed when you become a VP."
  • orik 13y ago
    He left the foundation board also. If anything I think he's going to be keeping his head low for a bit, internally and in the press.
• vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  I guess it's for the best. He simply became a magnet for controversy, so hopefully this quells people's sensibilities and lets the foundation focus on what it's meant to do.
• zobzu 13y ago
  "Congrats" - All that makes me feel personally is that the people who pushed for this are extremists as well. I don't know if that's a good move by Mozilla as well, although my guess is that it's a personal move from Eich who couldn't handle the pressure and the death threats (which, to be honest, I understand - even if some will say a CEO is supposed to be stronger than that).
  • opendais 13y ago
    Eh, I think everyone has a pain tolerance and he definitely met his. Personally, I would have preferred he said his mind had changed over the intervening years and that he had made a mistake. Then stayed CEO, of course. I think the real reason he left is the fact he had enough ethical integrity to realize his brand damaged Mozilla's brand. That, and his beliefs were unchanged so he could not offer a genuine retraction.
  • mathattack 13y ago
    A leader stepping down due to death threats is a terrible thing for an organization.
    • Borogove 13y ago
      Were there actually threats? I just googled "Brendan Eich threat" and didn't see anything relevant.
      • sp332 13y ago
        Yeah, Mozilla employees have also been threatened. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7525657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7525657
        • arjie 13y ago
          Death threats are terrible, frankly, but I've received death threats on the Internet for saying things about a video game. I hope he reports these incidents to the police because they are serious and the people involved should learn that threatening people with death is not something we allow in a civilized society. Perhaps I should have done the same. It has become far too acceptable to threaten people with death. Also, your link does not say that Mr. Eich received death threats, though other Mozilla employees do report receiving such threats.
• Oculus 13y ago
  I'm not sure how I feel about this one. On the one hand, Brendan Eich had some beliefs that were against Mozilla's core values, but on the other hand we just showed that when a mob on the Internet wants something - they get it. It's scary because this mob has global reach, unlimited power, but isn't always right.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  • smsm42 13y ago
    I'm kind of confused why a software project has to have any values about gay marriage. Should they also have values about abortion, gun control, marijuana legalization, single-payer healthcare, contraceptive funding, stem-cell research, fracking? You know, we have a lot of hot button topics here and a lot of groups who would like nothing more than make national news by attaching themselves to something or somebody famous and making a nice juicy controversy. Having nothing to do with what Mozilla foundation was supposed to do, but who cares?
    • bronson 13y ago
      Because the project employs gay people, some of whom would be in a position to receive marriage benefits from said project.
      • smsm42 13y ago
        So what? The project can also employ gun-owning people, marijuana-smoking people, birth-control-using people, healthcare-using people, etc. Those issues are hot issues because they interest a lot of people, and since big project employs a lot of people, it is inevitable that the intersection between people affected by the issue of the day and people working at big company is significant. And among them inevitably would be the people holding minority - or, in this case, unpopular majority opinion. If you refuse to interact with them, your circle of reference becomes very narrow indeed. Once diversity meant surrounding oneself with people different from you and learning to deal with them. Now some people understand diversity as surrounding oneself with people looking superficially different but thinking virtually the same, within very near bounds. This is just sad and wrong.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
  • roryhughes 13y ago
    Over one hundred in 8 minutes now!
  • dpritchett 13y ago
    HN has seen bigger stories: http://www.mattbearman.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/hn-steve-rip1.jpg http://www.mattbearman.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/hn-s...
• dmourati 13y ago
  Wow, what a rocky road at Mozilla these past few days/weeks. I wish them all the best. Kudos to those who spoke out against Eich. This is an important issue and a surprising outcome.
• chrismonsanto 13y ago
  My #1 question -- is Eich returning to CTO, another position, or quitting altogether? All in all, I think this was a pragmatic move. I am not a fan of this "CEO = literally the company" logic, though. I saw no reason to believe that he would use Mozilla to further an anti-gay agenda.
  • zabraxias 13y ago
    He's leaving. Which is typical for CEOs even if his tenure ended positively.
  • avenger123 13y ago
    The statement was intentionally vague in this. I wouldn't be surprised if he stays in a C-level position.
    • Borogove 13y ago
      Oddly, I have little problem with him staying as CTO. CEO is symbolic.
  • dopamean 13y ago
    > I saw no reason to believe that he would use Mozilla to further an anti-gay agenda. I agree. However, it's a little weird if you say you are a company who values diversity and different lifestyles but you have a CEO who is openly against a particular group of people. That kind of contradiction at the very top makes things weird.
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    • veemjeem 13y ago
      People change too. You can't hold it against someone all their life because they donated $1000 to prop 8. For the rest of his life, people will look at Eich differently simply due to the small donation amount many decades ago.
• dataminded 13y ago
  I wonder how much of an impact if any this will have on hiring at Mozilla.
• phillmv 13y ago
  From the recode recap - http://recode.net/2014/04/03/mozilla-co-founder-brendan-eich-resigns-as-ceo-and-also-from-foundation-board/ http://recode.net/2014/04/03/mozilla-co-founder-brendan-eich... >“It’s clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting,” said Baker, who added that she would not and could not speak for Eich. “The ability to lead — particularly for the CEO — is fundamental to the role and that is not possible here.” The most damning aspect of this was their a) inability to predict this would be an issue and b) their inability to deal with it once it did. All he had to do was lie and say "I understand how my activities can be seen as divisive and wrong and inconsistent with my commitment to upholding the diverse values underpinning the Mozilla community and I apologize for my behaviour at the time. I will do everything in my power to make up for it and I hope the community can judge me based me on my record from this point onwards". Then, find ways to anonymously engage in whatever political causes he supports, or wait till he's no longer CEO. The tone deafness of his last interview was kind of the last straw.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  • BuckRogers 13y ago
    """All he had to do was lie and say "I understand how my activities can be seen as divisive and wrong and inconsistent with my commitment to upholding the diverse values underpinning the Mozilla community and I apologize for my behaviour at the time. I will do everything in my power to make up for it and I hope the community can judge me based me on my record from this point onwards".""" He did say that. https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/
    • mef 13y ago
      He did not apologize for his behaviour, he expressed his "sorrow at having caused pain." Quite different.
      • waterlesscloud 13y ago
• Beliavsky 13y ago
  From the article: "We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public." Clearly people with socially conservative views are not welcome at Mozilla.
  • jroseattle 13y ago
    > people with socially conservative views The fallacy of this statement is that it conflates a citizen's unilateral restriction of freedom on another citizen as a "view". Don't fall for the argument due to soft labeling of what amounts to anything but equality.
  • bluthru 13y ago
    This is classic "Stop oppressing my oppression!" If you don't want to be treated differently for treating people differently, you can't treat people differently.
  • _t5yy 13y ago
    "any opinion is ok, as long as you're not conservative" I used to get this constantly in HS and now in college. This type of thinking is extremely toxic and I think can be very damaging for an institutions reputation. Mozilla is no longer about "openness" it's now about a much more generic liberal world view.
    • kylemaxwell 13y ago
      Bullshit. Any opinion is okay but if you are actively working to remove existing rights from other people, you can expect opprobrium. This applies especially when leading an organization with values like Mozilla's.
      • hackinthebochs 13y ago
        >but if you are actively working to remove existing rights from other people How is opposing redefining marriage (in the context of law) working to remove existing rights of people? Its framed in terms of removing rights/civil rights because it suits the cause. But this characterization is not supported by a dispassionate reading of the issue here.
• elwell 13y ago
  http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/01/mozilla-ceo-brendan-eich-refuses-to-quit http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/01/mozilla-ce...
• iamthepieman 13y ago
  Is there anything besides his donation to the Prop 8 effort that led to the controversy and him stepping down?
  • weixiyen 13y ago
    No.
  • apetresc 13y ago
    Nope.
  • Borogove 13y ago
    Yup. http://tim.dreamwidth.org/1845008.html http://tim.dreamwidth.org/1845008.html
  • Sidnicious 13y ago
    His (and Mozilla's) handling of the discovery of that donation contributed, AFAIK.
  • Jtsummers 13y ago
    He supported an anti-gay marriage candidate with campaign contributions. Essentially, if he'd not had the Prop 8 donation, and only the campaign contributions, no one would have made a connection. His donations would've shown that he supported Republican candidates (since he, outside a response to the Prop 8 donation, made no statements regarding gay marriage that anyone ever linked to) and nothing else.
    • anaphor 13y ago
      How do you know that he donated to these candidates primarily because of their anti-gay rights views anyway? Correlation != causation you know?
      • Jtsummers 13y ago
        We don't, but no correlation would have been made without the Prop 8 donation. That was my point.
• weixiyen 13y ago
  This is terrible. Way to go, Internets.
• coreymgilmore 13y ago
  Well it happened. I think this is a little extreme and that he shouldn't have succumbed to the pressure. Apparently freedom of speech is no longer accepted by plenty of people in the US. It is okay to put money towards and protest for equal rights, but anytime someone says something negative against it all hell breaks loose. That being said, in general, I think people are a little too sensitive toward anything non-politically-correct these days. At the end of the day, everyone can voice their own opinion. Some people will be supportive, some won't.
  • ZanyProgrammer 13y ago
    Nah freedom of speech is alive and well. Freedom of speech does not mean you're immune from other people exercising their freedom of speech.
    • coreymgilmore 13y ago
      touche. touche.
  • ForHackernews 13y ago
    This has nothing to do with "freedom of speech". Freedom of speech means the government can't legally punish you for expressing your views. It doesn't mean that nobody is allowed to criticize you or your views. In order for speech to mean something at all, it has to have consequences.
    • dllthomas 13y ago
      "Freedom of speech means the government can't legally punish you for expressing your views." Well, if the government is illegally punishing you for expressing your views, that seems like it's a free speech issue too. Individuals changing their reaction to you, not so much though - especially when that reaction is further speech.
  • m0a0t0 13y ago
    He can say what he likes, doesn't mean he isn't free from the consequences. Views that are wrong should be allowed to be held and said, but not be supported; especially by a company like Mozilla
• 27182818284 13y ago
  Holy crap, I thought the OKCupid thing was an April Fool's joke. I had no idea. Whoa.
  • spikels 13y ago
    Not a joke, possibly heartfelt, but certainly a great marketing coup for IAC.
  • blacksmith_tb 13y ago
    Will we get a new "it's ok that you're using Firefox page from them now"?
    • vacri 13y ago
      Nope. Just checked, and it silently takes you to the regular login page. Poor form, OKC.
  • wazoox 13y ago
    And OKCupid is still using javascript, though it was invented by Eich himself. The stupid, it hurts.
• booop 13y ago
  It's kind of sad and ironic to see his career take such a beating with what he helped create.
• lnlyplnt 13y ago
  This is just sad. Brendan was bullied for his personally help views that never once affected a working relationship he had with a colleague. This is the inventor of javascript does he not deserve some respect?
• benjohnson 13y ago
  "our large, global, and diverse community is what makes Mozilla special" Apparently diversity is narrower today.
  • matthewmacleod 13y ago
    Diversity as a concept cannot legitimately be defined to include intolerance as an attribute to be protected. Swap out "anti-gay-marriage" for "racist" or "anti-semitic" – it would be difficult to argue that calling for the resignation of an active campaigner against racial equality was "anti-diversity"; the same applies here.
    • viggity 13y ago
      I was against prop 8, it was stupid, but people act like it was going to throw members of the LGBT in prison or death camps or something.
      • matthewmacleod 13y ago
        I've not seen any evidence of that, and I don't see what your point is. I mean, it did actively strip civil rights from LGBT people, and that's pretty bad…
      • mpalmer 13y ago
        Not sure if you're a member of the LGBT community or not, but it sounds like your argument here is that because the reactions of others against Prop 8 were stronger than your own, they were invalid. It's not a very tenable position to take. Do you really believe the outcry over putting minorities in prison would parallel that of Prop 8?
        • viggity 13y ago
          No, I don't think they're invalid, I just think such strong visceral reactions are counterproductive. Prop 8 supporters and/or fence sitters are much less likely to have an open mind when someone is screaming at them that they're a bigot. Prop 8 supporters are wrong. Not Evil.
• andrewcooke 13y ago
  i've stood my ground for my beliefs when people were ridiculing me for doing so. it's a lonely position to be in. i didn't share eich's views here, but he's free to have them, and the reason for the problem is, ironically, the intolerance of other people (people forcing their "tolerance" down his throat). he has my respect. not for his view on gays. but for staying true to what he did. i think this is a shame.
  • wdewind 13y ago
    Except he didn't stand his ground at all. He never once explained his beliefs. If he had done that I think people would've been a lot more tolerant of him. I don't think it had to end this way.
    • badubu 13y ago
      Except that personal beliefs are just that, personal. You don't have to explain them.
    • rossjudson 13y ago
      Sure it did. The knives were out. Is it a requirement to explain what you believe? You can't just state it? I mean, there's no rational reason to oppose gay marriage, so attempting to rationalize it just comes off sounding stupid. Should we force a person to say stupid things? Maybe what you mean is to demand a conversation. Forcing someone to participate in a conversation doesn't seem right either. Does a person have the right to be close-minded?
      • wdewind 13y ago
        > Is it a requirement to explain what you believe? You can't just state it? I mean, there's no rational reason to oppose gay marriage, so attempting to rationalize it just comes off sounding stupid. Should we force a person to say stupid things? Someone who is CEO of a very public, very community driven company? I think it's reasonable to expect him to participate in a conversation about his beliefs, especially when those beliefs do not seem to reflect those of the community he represents and the community is a core part of the business. That conversation seems to me to be a part of the business itself. He doesn't have to believe certain things, but to be an effective CEO he has to have the community respect the integrity of his beliefs. He didn't even give them the opportunity to do so, and then complained that he was being witch hunted. All he had to do was say "No, actually I'm not a witch." Instead he said "I promise I wont speak any spells." This analogy is getting a bit silly, but you get my point. > Does a person have the right to be close-minded? Absolutely, and a person has the right to be close minded and run a company as well! This has NOTHING, let me repeat NOTHING, to do with Eich's rights.
• stefantalpalaru 13y ago
  This is an example of what a hate-driven vocal minority can do. It's scary.
  • username223 13y ago
    What, getting ousted as CEO for unrepentant bigotry? I'm not that scared.
    • Dirlewanger 13y ago
      And this "unrepentant bigotry" directly affected how many peoples' lives? No one's?
      • clavalle 13y ago
        Except all of those people affected by Prop 8, but, you know aside from those, right?
      • Aloisius 13y ago
        The thousands of gay couples who wanted to get married but couldn't because of donations like his? The denial of rights of gay couples who were married before prop 8? There are actual people who have been denied inheritance, denied the right to visit their partner in the hospital, denied the ability to go their loved one's funeral by their family because of prop 8.
        • wpietri 13y ago
          Whoever's downvoting you should be ashamed. The exact effect of Prop 8 was to strip marriage rights from people. And part of why it worked (until struck down in federal court as the civil rights violation its opponents always knew it to be) is the well-funded campaign in favor of it.
    • fakeanon 13y ago
      bigotry: bigoted attitudes; intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself. (source: Google definition box)
• Spooky23 13y ago
  So Mozilla supports diversity and freedom on many vectors -- as long as they are the correct positions. Certainly not a very courageous stance.
  • blueveek 13y ago
    Brendan chose to leave, because it was hurting Mozilla. This is not a "corporate decision".
    • gdwatson 13y ago
      It's hard to say whether or not that's true. Such resignations are asked for at least as often as they are volunteered.
  • TehCorwiz 13y ago
    He actively participated, via monetary contribution, in a movement whose purpose was to prevent a group of people from having the freedom to marry and share in the benefits that society and the government afford the married. This goes against what Mozilla stands for by virtue of the fact that they provide spousal benefits to all couples regardless of sexual orientation.
• news_to_me 13y ago
  I find this whole ordeal disappointing. Eich's personal beliefs should have only been criticized insofar as they impacted his ability as CEO. I'm not sure how much that would have been, but the attacks targeted Eich as a whole, and shouldn't have. Regardless, his stepping down seemed to be the only way to move Mozilla forward, which is a shame.
• IanDrake 13y ago
  To me this is a win for freedom of speech and free markets. You're free to express your close minded opinion, but the market is free to reject it and you.
  • MrZongle2 13y ago
    To me this is a win for freedom of speech How exactly was this a win for Eich's freedom of speech?
    • prutschman 13y ago
      If being CEO is a prerequisite to having freedom of speech then free speech is worth very little in practice. If it's not, then he has not lost his freedom of speech.
  • hackinthebochs 13y ago
    The way I see it, the exact opposite happened. There was no "free market" action that corrected for a bad choice of CEO. It was a minority of people with a large voice who were able to create and control a narrative and thus force a CEO out. This is the exact opposite of "free market".
  • daveqr 13y ago
    This was the opposite of a win for freedom of speech.
    • adamwong246 13y ago
      "Freedom of Speech" does not mean "Freedom from the Consequences of your Speech."
      • cousin_it 13y ago
        No, freedom of speech means exactly that people shouldn't be punished for speech. What else could it possibly mean?
• DangerousPie 13y ago
  I am a strong supporter of gay marriage, but I have to say that I find this very unfortunate and worrying. Apparently many Mozilla supporters seem to think it is okay to bully a qualified person out of his job only for his political views, even if they had absolutely no effect on his qualification or his actions on the job. I can't help but feel like this campaign has done a lot more harm to him than his $1000 donation could have ever done to anyone.
  • tripzilch 13y ago
    Just because it's still up for debate in some of the more unenlightened parts of the world doesn't mean it's a reasonable position to support. So, many things can be argued to be a "political view" somewhere.
  • matthewmacleod 13y ago
    Apparently many Mozilla supporters seem to think it is okay to bully a qualified person out of his job only for his political views, even if they had absolutely no effect on his qualification I disagree that those views had no effect on his qualification. Mozilla's values specifically talk about diversity and inclusion; Eich has previously acted in a way that's totally incompatible with those views. On top of that, he did not succeed in defusing the situation before it got to this stage – something which I would expect a person in an important and visible leadership position to be able to deal with. Remember that Eich had previously actively campaigned against removing civil rights from people employed within the ranks of Mozilla, and indeed members of the wider community. How can it legitimately be called bullying to oppose the appointment of somebody as a community leader when that person has been actively seeking to harm you?
  • dnr 13y ago
    One person losing his job, compared to millions of people not being able to marry the person they love? Even if you figure that $1000 as a fraction of the money raised by the campaign, you're still talking about significant emotional harm to hundreds or thousands of people directly affected within CA. But the effects are actually much greater, because the CA decision was not made in a vacuum: it affected public sentiment all over the country, and the world. Delays in full marriage equality in CA mean delays in general societal acceptance of gay people, which means more bullying of LGBT children and teenagers, more suicides, more people getting disowned by their families. Equating the harm done to him to even a fraction of the direct and follow-on effects of the prop 8 campaign seems almost offensive, to me. [Edit: Even so, I think the reaction was a little over the top and this outcome was unfortunate. However, I don't feel bad for him.]
• sylvinus 13y ago
  Extremely saddened by this. I hope "activists" with misguided anger will realize the web is worse off today than it was yesterday. Why I supported him as CEO: https://medium.com/p/5f43d452bd89 https://medium.com/p/5f43d452bd89
• MrZongle2 13y ago
  Competency be damned! He held controversial opinions and supported like-minded causes! Destroy him! Edit: Downvotes, but no replies. Come on, kids...if you think I'm wrong then explain.
  • matthewmacleod 13y ago
    He held personal opinions which were incompatible with those of the organisation he was leading, and were actively opposed to the interests of many in the wider community he was a visible and important leader of. That's why there was so much backlash against the appointment, and in itself stands as evidence that he was not a suitable choice for the position.
    • MrZongle2 13y ago
      First: thank you for responding, regardless of your up/down/no vote. But I disagree that his personal opinions were incompatible with Mozilla. They make software, Eich makes software. Mozilla has nothing to do with social activism. Well, at least, they didn't until now.
      • matthewmacleod 13y ago
        Mozilla explicitly states that one of it's goals is to foster an inclusive and diverse software community. In their position, where they do so much work related to community engagement, do you not see how the views of their CEO conflicting with their stated mission is a problem?
        • bashcoder 13y ago
          Whatever your beliefs, I'm not sure how this saga fosters either inclusiveness or diversity, and I'm afraid the word community has lost all meaning.
        • blisterpeanuts 13y ago
          If they're inclusive and diverse, then they should welcome people with different political perspectives. This isn't about tolerance and inclusiveness. It's about satisfying an angry, vindictive segment of the population that demands a sacrifice. Whether morally right or not, they have stepped in some deep doo-doo, and offended a broad swath of Mozilla supporters.
• grn 13y ago
  Personally I don't know what to think when organizations mix their core business (e.g. making a web browser) and politics (e.g. support for free speech). I'd like to see politics and business as separate as possible. What do you think?
  • mhurron 13y ago
    A little difficult to do when part of what made the Mozilla Foundation what it is is supporting equality. It would be hard to see a Skinhead leading a Kosher brand for the same reason.
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    • grn 13y ago
      > A little difficult to do when part of what made the Mozilla Foundation what it is is supporting equality. Could you elaborate? I'm really not aware of the internals of the company.
    • blisterpeanuts 13y ago
      It would be hard to see a neo-Nazi appointed head of NAACP, too. Or a rabidly fundamentalist Baptist put in charge of Union of Reform Judaism. But that's not what happened here. Eich is not an extremist. His views were well within the mainstream, at least 4 years ago when this proposition was on the ballot. Heck it passed with 7 million voters in favor. Had he voted yes but not donated that $1000, no one would have even found out. What a stupid thing to pillory someone over, with all the problems in the world.
• tbassetto 13y ago
  The article is not clearly saying it but he is leaving Mozilla, not just stepping down as CEO.
  • camus2 13y ago
    source?
    • tbassetto 13y ago
      Got the info by email from a trusted source (I have been a Mozilla contributor)
      • richardjs 13y ago
        It's also mentioned on his blog, or at least the statement "I’ve resigned as CEO and I’m leaving Mozilla to take a rest..." [1]. Doesn't explicitly say he's never coming back, but certainly says he's leaving Mozilla for a time. [1] https://brendaneich.com/2014/04/the-next-mission/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/04/the-next-mission/
  • Di4YouPu 13y ago
    Mozilla is dead
    • jackmaney 13y ago
      I hope you're right.
• sethbannon 13y ago
  Comments here are pretty supportive of Brendan but I see this as nothing but a victory for Mozilla and a victory for consumer activism. It should be clear by now that you cannot run a large company in the public eye while you espouse vitriolic and discriminatory views that belong in the last century.
  • wyclif 13y ago
    Except that he didn't "espouse vitriolic and discrimatory views." A majority of voters in CA pulled the lever for Prop 8. 70% of African-American voters in CA voted "yes" for Prop 8. Doesn't sound discriminatory to me. What it sounds like is political correctness run amok, and punishment for thought crime.
    • clavalle 13y ago
      So the majority can't discriminate against a minority? And those in other minority groups cannot discriminate against a minority? Is that your argument?
    • PhasmaFelis 13y ago
      You seem to be under the impression that no majority vote can be discriminatory. I cannot rightly apprehend such a confusion of ideas.
    • etfb 13y ago
      Every complaint about "political correctness gone mad" (that's the Daily Mail catchphrase you're paraphrasing here) really boils down to this: I enjoy acting like a prick. Somebody with more power than me is forcing me to stop acting like a prick. I don't like it.
  • Zelphyr 13y ago
    There is ample evidence that he never once espoused his views at Mozilla. So much so that his own co-founder didn't realize he had such a position until it came to light 13 years into their working relationship. What the LGBT community needs is true victory where they're treated no differently from anyone else. This is only a victory for the righteous indignation that is rampant on the Internet. It is pretty sad that those who were most vocal about Mr. Eich stepping down because of his beliefs no doubt have little problem giving their money to the likes of Orson Scott Card who I would submit is considerably more harmful to the cause than Brendan Eich has been.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• adrianlmm 13y ago
  Well, I won't use Firefox anymore and I won't use anything related to Mozilla, I can't tolerate this injustice.
  • broflosup 13y ago
    I'm kind of conflicted. On one hand, there's Chrome, but it's used by Google to help US government spy on you. On another hand, there's Mozilla. Both good browsers but are being developed by pretty evil people.
    • anaphor 13y ago
      Code, especially of the FLOSS kind, is not really 'evil'. I mean I guess you could write a free system for censoring or something, but it's not like a closed version wouldn't pop up in its place and be just as hard to circumvent. Anyway have you looked at GNU IceCat? It's a fork of Firefox that doesn't recommend any non-free addons and has some other privacy features baked in.
    • openjck 13y ago
      Mozilla employee here. Please remember that Mozilla is not one person. Mozilla is a global community of people, staff and volunteers, working to protect and care for the web in a way that no other group of people can. We are not perfect, but we are generally good people, and we are trying our hardest to do good, selfless work. Be angry about Brendan, but please do not let your anger cross over to the project itself. Mozilla is about so much more than one executive.
      • adrianlmm 13y ago
        No, if the Mozilla staff can't grow a pair and stand by one of his employees then I don't want to have any relationship with them.
  • vacri 13y ago
    That's as bad as the people calling for the boycott if Eich remained at the helm. Mozilla is more than just the CEO.
• gum_ina_package 13y ago
  I honestly feel like Brendan is the victim here. He might have religious or moral views on gay marriage that some of us don't agree with, but being forced to step down as CEO because of those views... well that's something I don't think any of his critics should be proud of.
  • gkya 13y ago
    I totally agree. People should be free to possess political views and support organisations that defend those views, even though those views are not favourable to others, as long as no anti-democratic and/or violent act is taken. Gay marriage might be subject to many dissidences, and if supporting one side in such situation causes one to get forced and threatened to quit their job in a culture, it's certain that that culture has nothing to do with freedom (of speech) or democracy. I personally support gay marriage, and freedom of gay people; but have concerns with gay couples adopting, because as far as I am aware, the utopia in which those children adopted by gay couples would not be bullied and ridiculed does not exist.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  • macspoofing 13y ago
    On the other hand, those that didn't agree with those views were free to boycott and criticize Mozilla. Mozilla Foundation was also free to live with those consequences or decide that they didn't want their brand to be associated or muddled by its CEO's accidentally public position on a very sensitive topic. My view: It's a shame that Eich decided to stand his ground on this issue. It's a real shame that he felt so strongly about his position that he sacrificed his job for it. I wish he would have found something more important to stand his ground over.
    • gum_ina_package 13y ago
      More important than his morality and/or religious views?
      • 13y ago
• mbillie1 13y ago
  All of this over a $1,000 donation, apparently. I think it's a bad cause and a bad donation, and I don't have any sympathy at all for the anti-gay-marriage types, but it's crazy to me to hang someone over a thousand dollar donation. What percentage of the total money donated to prop 8 do you think that represented?
  • wyclif 13y ago
    Eich didn't make that donation yesterday, you know. But I agree. He made a small donation to a political cause. Are we going to start ritually sacrificing people who don't line up with our personal causes and opinions? I think this sets a draconian precedent. If this is where the culture in the Valley is headed, I'm incredibly glad I'm not a part of it.
    • matthewmacleod 13y ago
      Are we going to start ritually sacrificing people who don't line up with our personal causes and opinions? No - we are hopefully going to continue objecting to the appointment of people whose personal views are incompatible with the values of the organisation they are supposed to represent. That's totally legitimate, and I absolutely fail to see what is wrong with doing so.
      • mbillie1 13y ago
        I guess a personal donation, to me, of a material-but-not-enormous amount, toes the line between "personal views" being thrown out there in the public, and things that are pretty much ones own business. I have no problem with an organization saying "we don't like Mr. Eich's frequent outspoken rants against homosexuals" (if there were any), but the fact that the guy wrote a $1,000 check one time? Eh... to me this approaches the territory of getting mad at someone for laughing at a homosexual joke. Poor taste, I don't agree with it, but I don't necessarily think it ought to be treated as a public representation of ones personal views.
      • wyclif 13y ago
        A software developer and friend of mine wrote this just now, upon hearing the news. I thought I'd share it here because I thought it was apt: Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard. You also need free speech to discuss what equality means, but apparently that is no longer possible; our culture-makers have now decided there is a univocal conception of equality that must be imposed on everyone.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• m0a0t0 13y ago
  It seems, from the comments here, that speaking and donating against equal rights is a protected freedom but as soon as anyone is called out for it then that isn't allowed.
• greatsuccess 13y ago
  While this was probably inevitable, has anyone noticed how Mozilla seems to refer to itself as some sort of holy entity thats completely entitled to its position in the universe? Which is interesting for a company which is basically the equivalent of NPR, wholly supported and funded by Google. Im a little sick of their schtick in general and while it would be better for them to have a CEO who is not a douche, I have to wonder why Mozilla thinks they are so important and worthy of industry subsidies. What have you done for me lately, Mozilla?
• Touche 13y ago
  This really saddens me. It is a black-mark on the gay rights movement. Eich made a mistake when he supported prop 8. History will clearly show this, like history has shown those who opposed interracial marriage were wrong. Being on the right-side of history isn't about stomping out those who opposed you when you finally win. It's not about retribution for past slights. Did we learn nothing from Nelson Mandela?
  • koof 13y ago
    Would you call someone being removed from a position of power "stomping out"? Eich can and will still live a decent life and nobody in their right mind is denying him his right to that, but remember that he did seek to deny those rights to others.
  • camus2 13y ago
    > Eich made a mistake when he supported prop 8 Nothing proves that Eich think he did make a mistake. He never apologized for that and refused to talk about it.I'm sure he would not need to resign if he did apologize. People make mistakes, and most people will forgive if an apology is issued.
    • Touche 13y ago
      It doesn't matter what Eich thinks. History isn't going to reverse course so there's no need for those who are wrong to fall to their knees and beg for forgiveness. Being graceful in victory is about letting those who opposed you to get away with their mistake.
      • OpieCunningham 13y ago
        How many lives need to be ruined before an oppressed community can fight back? Sainthood should not be a bar that everyone must meet in order to avoid being labeled with a black mark. This guy attacked a large group of people and that group defended itself by explaining their displeasure at his recent privilege. He then suffered the consequence of having his privilege removed. Good.
• rjknight 13y ago
  I feel bad about this because several good people did defend the principle that an employee's personal views should be allowed to remain purely personal, that we should be able to get along in society even with those who we are vehemently opposed to in the political sphere. I worry that this will now be seen as a defeat for that principle, as proof that your political views will be held against you if you become prominent enough, and given the data trails that we all leave behind us, that could get ugly. Some (but not all!) of the people who campaigned for him to quit were themselves dismissive of this principle, and if they 'won' then I can't really say I'm happy about it. EDIT: clarity
• spikels 13y ago
  This is sad. I wish I lived in a world where your personal beliefs, even very unpopular ones, could be kept separate from your professional life. Unfortunately we seem to need to put people in a single box.
  • vacri 13y ago
    It means that there is now a precedent for anti-gay folks to argue against homosexuals being employed against the principles of the company, even when those principles are not the core product. "This hardware company espouses conservative Christian values - you can't work here because of your opinions". Separation of personal opinion and professional life goes beyond CxO staff.
    • dragonwriter 13y ago
      > It means that there is now a precedent for anti-gay folks to argue against homosexuals being employed against the principles of the company, even when those principles are not the core product. Actually, no, that precedent has existed for a long time -- in the form of fairly widespread and legal workplace discrimination against homosexuals -- which is one of the reasons that supporters of LGBT rights have sought to have sexual orientation enshrined in state and federal law as an explicitly prohibited basis for employment, housing, and other discrimination, as it is currently not in federal law in the US [1], or in the laws of many of the states (though it is in some states.) [1] Although, in the sphere of employment, there are recent executive decisions at the federal level to treat orientation discrimination -- and other forms of gender stereotyping -- as sex discrimination, and thereby prohibited by laws that prohibit sex discrimination. But whether that interpretation will stand up in court remains to be seen.
  • rjd 13y ago
    It's also about his ability to be a leader, if people lost the ability to respect him then he looses the ability to lead. That happened, he had to go.
    • spikels 13y ago
• wil421 13y ago
  Its sad this guy is losing his job over an unrelated personal choice. But: Who donates money to stop same sex marriage? I mean I have much bigger things on my plate than stopping someone from making a lifestyle choice. And I have MUCH better things to do with my money.
• camus2 13y ago
  First, i want to say to Eich,that he is entitled to his opinions and noone is going to go after him with pitchforks and torches for that. Next, I believe that was the right decision. Because it put Mozilla into a difficult position. You might think all this anger was excessive perhaps it was, yet it casted a negative image on Mozilla,since the CEO is a public figure for a company. I hope this event will open up a real debate about gay rights and why it equal rights matter, because more rights for gays doesnt mean less rights for straight people,like civil rights for blacks did not end up reducing white people's rights, and then we can move on to other things,like you know , technology.
  • jibber 13y ago
    >I hope this event will open up a real debate Seems like it will discourage people from expressing their view. Who wants to endanger their career?
• haberman 13y ago
  Really torn about this. On one hand it seemed pretty clear that Brendan was not letting these views carry over into his professional life. On the other hand, using his power (in this case, money) to actively stand against equality makes him, in my mind, an active and willing participant in the overall power structure that denies and marginalizes gay people. If I were gay I can imagine that being a bitter pill to swallow from someone who is the head of an organization that I worked for or supported. And likely not a great match for an organization that specifically prides itself on inclusiveness.
  • pbiggar 13y ago
    Congrats, this is possibly the best comment in the entire thread. Issues like this are rarely black and white, and this is grayer than most. As a former Mozillian, I'm frustrated that a great person to lead Mozilla held such destructive views about other human beings. Brendan is, in my limited interactions with him, a wonderful person who has done great things. It's very difficult to know how to combine that with the idea that he is opposed to equality for a large group of people.
    • acomjean 13y ago
      I spent a lot of time on construction sites doing inspections early in my career. It was hard to fathom some really you got to know as really nice people being really bigoted. Weirder when the targets of those comments worked with the person making the comments. Archie Bunker is truer to real life than I had possibly imagined. I think this will be best for Mozilla. Its an organization that needs the good will.
• izacus 13y ago
  So what's the next step at Mozilla? Going through all department heads and eliminating those that are conservative cristians as well? Also those that don't agree with Obamacare? Considering I've lived in a socialistic country where political party you belonged to was critical to attaining any leadership position... I'd really rather not return to that world. It was toxic, inefficient and downright unfair. Politics, religion and personal beliefs shoud NOT be a factor when choosing a person for position at a company.
  • camus2 13y ago
    > Going through all department heads and eliminating those that are conservative cristians as well? It has nothing to do with being a conservative christian. > Considering I've lived in a socialistic country where political party you belonged to was critical to attaining any leadership position i'm sure this country wasnt gay friendly either...was it?
• shmerl 13y ago
  Sad and wrong. But I guess Mozilla didn't want to deal with all that flaming directed at them.
• fredgrott 13y ago
  I do not think anyone won here as Mozilla had an opportunity to call both BE and the other parties into some type of meeting with real dialogue..but instead will still have thins not solved.. Here are the still smoldering issues: 1. Religious right still wants to hold the marriage license as their property..Separation of Church and State occurred over 500 years ago in Western Cultures an governments.. 2. Bigotry and Ignorance
• dkhenry 13y ago
  This is a dangerous precedent. On one hand this is the only thing Brendan can do its clear that the community at large will not accept dissenting opinions, but its really a small step between holding this line for a CEO and holding it for any employee.
  • sethish 13y ago
    Slippery slope argument? Really?
• wyclif 13y ago
  The ritual sacrifice is now complete http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/04/mozilla-mo-problems http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/04/mozilla-mo...
• maga 13y ago
  First it was Ryan Dahl, then Ben Noordhuis, and now Brendan Eich... I can't really believe it's happening again.
  • camus2 13y ago
    > First it was Ryan Dahl, then Ben Noordhuis, and now Brendan Eich... I can't really believe it's happening again. what? what the heck are talking about ?
    • stormcrowsx 13y ago
      I'll take a stab at this one. The CIA/NSA/Government is setting up Javascript for failure (to save all of us sane programmers). Eich is just the next in their list to discredit and undermine Javascript's leadership.
• chippy 13y ago
  I think the whole thing is sickening. Why? Because there are CEO's and companies that you and I use and love that are not boycotted. That are not hounded. That support the murder of people around the world. That support the exploitation of people. That pollute the environment. That invade the privacy of people's lives. That make the world a worse place. That we and our governments support. These are the targets that should be addressed.
• Beliavsky 13y ago
  Suppose conservative activists push out a CEO because he contributes to Planned Parenthood or otherwise supports legal abortion. Would the Eich critics be OK with that? Many conservatives believe that stopping abortion is as much about human rights as liberals think gay marriage is. Both sides can play the game of getting people fired for views unrelated to their jobs. It would be better if neither side did.
  • faet 13y ago
    Many oppose companies that push a "gay agenda" or support abortion. In 1986, 7-Eleven stopped selling Playboy and Penthouse magazines after a two-year boycott by the AFA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Family_Association http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Family_Association
• benched 13y ago
  Half of the people in this thread are deeply confused about the relationship between civil rights and popular opinion. The latter is a perception of the former, not the cause or definition.
• jeremyt 13y ago
  Well, now, since we've got this all straightened out, let's just do it right the next time. Reply below with your suggestions on what political views will be litmus tests for CEO positions in the future. We can compile a list, and then dig into the next candidate's background to make sure that all of her or his views are within the realm of acceptability. A lot of people just want to apply this to the CEO position, but frankly a hostile work environment can be created by coworkers, too. So, I propose that we dig into the backgrounds of all the people that work at Mozilla and make sure that the organization is thoroughly purged of people who could possibly offend someone with her or his views.
  • facepalm 13y ago
    A CEO should be a woman.
    • gred 13y ago
      Bonus points if she was formerly a man.
• xaa 13y ago
  My father-in-law is a high-level official in the "Alliance Defending Freedom", which is essentially the conservative counterpart to the ACLU, providing legal advice to conservative causes. For years, he's been telling me about the "gay liberal agenda", which, to him, was not just about promoting gay rights, but also about silencing any freedom of speech advocating opposing viewpoints. I always pooh-poohed him and gently asserted that he was on the wrong side of history. Now, I think he's right. That someone can be ousted from their job because of privately held opinions and personal donations is extremely scary to me -- and I'm in favor of gay rights and gay marriage. You can't correct injustice and intolerance with more injustice and intolerance.
  • clavalle 13y ago
    Free speech doesn't mean no consequences for your speech -- it means the government cannot interfere with your speech (within reason). When you make political speech it is necessarily public not a privately held opinion. He made a political donation showing that he supported a law that curtailed a group of people's natural Right. That donation was used to try and affect public policy. That is not some theory he holds for himself, that is action that directly affects others. Just because people hold opinions doesn't mean you have to tolerate them.
    • xaa 13y ago
      Let me put it a different way, since the term "free speech" admittedly has many different connotations. My day job is as a scientist. In science, individual researchers put forth many different ideas, some right, some wrong. Over time, we come to a consensus on which ideas are right and wrong, and the right ideas are kept and the wrong ideas are dropped. However, we don't blackball people who had the wrong ideas: on the contrary, we want to encourage diverse ideas and opinions because it is only through the conflict of these ideas that truth emerges. I don't want to live in a society where people have to fear for their jobs or a public mob action because they espoused an unpopular opinion. I disagree with Eich's opinion today, but tomorrow I could be in the minority. Yes, the wrong ideas can be harmful, but in my opinion if we have an open marketplace of ideas, rather than the "chilling effects" of political correctness (or religion, or any other force that says that there are unspeakable ideas), the truth will eventually out. Case in point: gay marriage itself. A few years ago it was a radical idea, now it's just a matter of time before it becomes legal nationwide in the US. Ironically, the only reason there was enough political force to oust Eich is because his viewpoints are now in the minority.
• SloughFeg 13y ago
  In a sad way, all the activists have really done given a good example for why political donations records should be kept away from the public.
• facepalm 13y ago
  "We believe in free speech, therefore this guy who has an unpopular opinion has to step down". Yeah right... (And I am pro gay marriage, but I can respect if people oppose it).
• ringe 13y ago
  How come the only way you can be open-minded is to have all your opinions narrowly placed in the current politically correct mindset?
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• cbarton 13y ago
  ... with all this BS, I wonder what the new Javascript will be! But in all seriousness, I wonder what his coworkers thought of him, if he was parading around his views or would focus more on work (bc that's what's important after all), any blog links for me to discover more?
• calebgilbert 13y ago
  Just wanted to put myself on record as thinking what happened to Brendan Eich as being something that is totally shameful. Nerd/geek/tech culture totally intolerant of anyone outside of exactly a certain mold. People should be able to donate to what they want to, and one 'misdeed' (which is arguable) should not undo every good deed. Amazing someone doesn't 'deserve to keep their job' for donating to just about anything, let alone for a prop that actually passed in a popular vote! So guess the lesson is that according to 'gay rights' over half the voting population in CA shouldn't have a job. Right on.
• rdl 13y ago
  I think the big takeaway from all this will be an increase in anonymous contributions in politics. We've seen this already at the SuperPAC level (where the goal is mainly to contribute huge amounts of money, more so than anonymity), but this might bring it down to the grassroots contributor. I'm pretty open about RKBA/2A issues, and donate a small amount of money to things like SAF, but that's not a hugely controversial issue. Pro-MAPS/LEAP/etc. (ending the drug war) could be controversial, but much less so from the "the drug war is racist and ineffective and should be replaced with harm reduction" perspective, vs. "drugs are great!" If I were anti-abortion in Silicon Valley, or anti-gay, or anti-immigration, or anything else which were deeply unpopular in the majority of the community, there's no way I'd want any record of my contributions now. In other communities, the inverse views would be criticized. When the donations aren't tax-deductible, or where the deduction isn't significant, I guess I can see people moving to fully anonymous contributions. Making viral content, anonymous financial contributions, advertising purchases online in small enough amounts that they can be made with throwaway payment instruments and nothing really linking them, etc. Anonymously funding things like an iOS game which happens to include a political message -- is that advertising? etc.
• bowlofpetunias 13y ago
  I am stunned at how many people on HN seem to thing Eich should not be judged on his personal so-called "political" views. If he was a racist in favor of segregation would people still take that position? I seriously doubt it.
  • barking 13y ago
    Taking a view is one thing, persecution is another.
    • beedogs 13y ago
      Right. And he donated to help eliminate gay marriage in California; to me, that counts as persecution.
  • JasonFruit 13y ago
    I would absolutely take that position. How is it relevant to his position? Can't someone pragmatically act as is appropriate to the world that is, while working to remake it as they believe it should be?
    • wpietri 13y ago
      If Mozilla appointed, say, a KKK Grand Wizard to the post of CEO, that would definitely be relevant. First, because every non-white person would immediately have rational cause to fear discrimination. Second, because every anti-racist employee, partner, and donor would have incentive to reevaluate their willingness to help Mozilla along. And third, it would be an enormous PR nightmare, an unending distraction from Mozilla's actual work. All companies are human institutions. And nonprofits basically all make a deal with their employees: You may not get paid as much, but you'll be doing something you believe in. It's immensely powerful, but it does mean you have to keep it a place that people can believe in.
      • JasonFruit 13y ago
        There's a big difference between donating $1000 to a legal political cause and being a leader in an organization known for violent and illegal activity. If someone donated $1000 to the Freedom From Religion Foundation's legal fund, would that mean they could not be the CEO of a non-profit organization that might employ religious people?
• filmgirlcw 13y ago
  What I still can't understand is how Eich was ever approved by the board to begin with. His qualifications aside, the very fact that this had already become public before and was clearly antithetical to the ethos of Mozilla's position as a company should have excluded him from ever getting the job. As CTO, people might have disagreed with his opinion, but it's hard to make a salient argument that he should be forced out for having that opinion. It's a bit different when your job entails overseeing an entire organization -- including HR -- and you financially contribute to causes that aim to exclude some of your current or future employees.
  • blisterpeanuts 13y ago
    Slippery slope. No one should ever be "forced out" for having an opinion. If there are employees who feel he doesn't properly manage them or "represent" them or they feel he is "oppressing" them, well maybe they are the ones with the problem and should go work some place else, or just work harder to defend their rights during their off hours without bringing it into the workplace. There's no evidence that Eich was bringing it into the workplace. This whole thing is based on a contribution to a successful ballot question several years ago.
• robinhowlett 13y ago
  I wouldn't be surprised if this scenario will be repeated within the free software tech community for other contentious issues. As we see with recent Supreme Court actions taken by Hobby Lobby, company leadership's personal viewpoints do influence people's relationships to those companies. It appears the most vocal against Eich view, I imagine, same-sex marriage as a fundamental human right. Will other topics go this way, like, for example, the "climate change" debate, especially as those topics evolve? There seems is a rising group of people who view skepticism/denial of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change akin to that level. Mozilla's Manifesto doesn't speak to holding any particular viewpoint outside of promotion of a free, accessible Internet and free, open software. However, the principle of "transparent community-based processes promote participation, accountability and trust" must have influenced both the internal culture and its users, who felt that Eich's actions didn't reflect their views. Chick-fil-a is in the reverse scenario but doesn't seem to experience this kind of thing.
• Di4YouPu 13y ago
  As inventor of javaScript, working for Netscape and later for Mozilla, without Brendan Eich the project is dead. Homo or hetero... You all have problems with your sexual fantasies. Did I miss to say "fucking"? Should I give a "fuck" about you? Back in your pants, stupid!
• apetresc 13y ago
  Mozilla's stance on respecting people's private, personal decisions (as a company working on a communication medium) is way more important to me than its stance on same-sex politics. Where did all the privacy advocates suddenly disappear to? I'm staunchly pro-gay-rights and would've debated Eich vociferously on the issue of gay marriage back in 2008 if he had chosen to make his opinion public (which he didn't), but frankly Mozilla firing somebody based on a private donation to a political cause makes me want to boycott it more than the donation ever did. This seems like a textbook case of the privacy abuse that the tinfoil-hatters are usually getting so worked up about.
  • blisterpeanuts 13y ago
    That's basically how I feel as well. Almost anyone has a skeleton or two in the closet that some enterprising journalist might dig up, just to ruin his career. We Americans are scandal-happy and rather intolerant, including those who think of themselves as "more tolerant than thou" which in fact is an insidious form of intolerance!
• retartyr 13y ago
  "HN's approach to comments". if it meant anything, every flame-fanning article on this subject should have been [dead] before it reached 5 comments.
• simon_ 13y ago
  To summarize a sentiment I see underlying some of the "conservative" positions on HN on Eich: all of us who are pro gay marriage (me very much included[0]) might want to think pretty carefully about the political culture we want to create. Regardless of how exceptional and crystal-clear this moral issue is, if we accept personal attacks against political opponents, we are clearly "upping the ante" and creating a huge chilling effect against honest dialogue. Somewhere in the vicinity of 50% of the US holds the immoral view here, and if we believe they deserve shunning and serious personal consequences, then we are... well, pretty aggressive. Even if aggression is warranted, are we sure we want a culture tolerant of this much political aggression? You might be in the wrong 50% next time, and unfortunately there may not be a way to create a culture tolerant of aggression only by those who are morally right / agree with us. Clearly none of Eich's fundamental rights are violated here, but that still doesn't mean we should want to "go there". [0] You can see from the very high volume of statements like this how scared people are to be associated with the wrong side here.
  • ralfd 13y ago
    I agree with you. I recently read on reddit a report by someone who was fired by his conservative company because he had an Obama decal on his car and found that incredibly crazy and toxic. This is now from the other side.
• FreedomFan 13y ago
  This is awful. I never thought I'd see the tech community target a person like this for a witchhunt because of what are presumably religious beliefs. Eich did nothing illegal. All he did was exercise his First Amendment right. There's no reason to believe that he would ever allow his personal beliefs to affect his decisions as a CEO. Basically, this is thoughtcrime.
  • quasque 13y ago
    No-one is saying he did anything illegal, and this certainly isn't 'thoughtcrime' - he actively donated money to a bigoted cause, an action incompatible with the values of the organisation that he was the public face of. That is the core issue here.
• blisterpeanuts 13y ago
  This outcome makes me sad. Although I support legally recognized gay marriage with all the accompanying benefits such as hospital visitation rights and next-of-kin status (arguably these are the two real benefits), I most emphatically do not support the political correctness attacks on Mozilla's co-founder. Mozilla and the open source community have been gravely hurt by this move. The witch hunt to oust Eich from Mozilla was not just unfair, it was a travesty. He co-founded Mozilla and created some of the key technologies in Mozilla products. I am much less inclined to support Mozilla monetarily or in any other capacity from this point on. Call me a hypocrite, call me whatever you like, but I feel that strongly. This guy should not have been treated this way. What's more, I suspect that were he a white female or a black person or an Asian instead of a white male, the voices of hate would have been more muted. It's much harder to criticize a person "of color" or a female in this politically correct era, out of fear of being called out as a hypocrite. Which I believe them to be, anyway. This has done nothing to improve the lot of gay Americans; in fact, it is a sorry blot on the history of gay rights and decent people of whatever sexual orientation will ultimately distance themselves from it. Mob rule is nothing to be proud of.
  • mindslight 13y ago
    > I am much less inclined to support Mozilla monetarily or in any other capacity from this point on. Call me a hypocrite, call me whatever you like, but I feel that strongly. This guy should not have been treated this way. There were many more saying they would stop supporting Mozilla if he remained CEO. Brendan Eich is a victim not of Mozilla, but of the controversy-generating journalism industry. Keep supporting efforts for an open web and make sure you're running Adblock to avoid funding these parasites.
• agapos 13y ago
  For every people who says that "the CEO is the face of an organisation": can you name all the former Mozilla CEO's? Or any CEO who wasn't Jobs or Ballmer? Honestly, I am curious.
  • ZanyProgrammer 13y ago
    Larry Ellison, Eric Schmidt.Carly Fiorina. Meg Whitman.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• ternaryoperator 13y ago
  If diversity does not include people with opposing political viewpoints, it's not diversity.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• thrwwwy 13y ago
  Eich's outing was as a result of a leak from an IRS employee. Could he sue the US government, and/or the IRS employee that leaked the donor list? It pains me to use a National Review blog as a source but it seems that the Obama administration hasn't made an effort to prosecute the leaker: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/362667/investigation-ids-irs-leaker-eliana-johnson http://www.nationalreview.com/article/362667/investigation-i...
  • dnr 13y ago
    Campaign contributions over $200 are public record in California. This information has been publicly available since 2008, it's just that nobody bothered to look before. You can see his contributions here (the site is really slow for me right now): http://dbsearch.ss.ca.gov/ http://dbsearch.ss.ca.gov/
• Yoric 13y ago
  I see many people discussing freedom of speech and the right to be against gay marriage (or some metaphors thereof). While this is partially true, I believe that this is largely missing several points. Brendan Eich made a private choice in a democratic vote. This private choice was leaked 4 years after the fact. Two more years later, this private choice prevents him from stepping into a new position. Brendan Eich went out of his way to avoid discussing this private choice, and still his privacy on the matter (and a few others) was turned into a public thing and put into the front of a mob. Not good. Also, people seem to forget that Brendan Eich was (briefly) CEO of an organization that has as many ties and contributors in parts of the world where homosexuality is problematic, forbidden, or even punishable by death. While Brendan Eich's fall from position is a win for some, I can imagine the whole campaign having nasty and unwanted consequences for open-source communities (not just Mozilla's) around the world.
  • dnr 13y ago
    You seem to not be very familiar with the facts. We can guess that he voted for prop 8, but his vote is truly private and nobody but him knows how he voted. What do know is that he gave $1000 to an organization that campaigned for the proposition. This is a matter of public record, by law in California. It was not "leaked" (well, it was leaked, but it was also publicly available in 2008 if anyone had bothered to look). You can find his contributions by searching here: http://dbsearch.ss.ca.gov/ http://dbsearch.ss.ca.gov/ It would have been clearly stated on the form that he filled out to make his contribution that contributions over $200 would be made public. He knew that, and made the contribution anyway.
• darasen 13y ago
  Just remember free speech and an open mind are encouraged. Unless you disagree with the LGBT agenda.
• codeoclock 13y ago
  I've seen some people defending him for various reasons, most prominently because he has a right to free speech. Of course he has a right to free speech, and he exercised it. He also has the responsibility to accept the consequences. His actions/speech made enough people angry enough to exercise their speech to the extent that Eich's position was no longer tenable. People too often forget that rights don't mean that there will be no consequences to exercising those rights (within the bounds of the law, and other things).
• general_failure 13y ago
  Everyone has a right to opinion. Brendan has his opinion. The internet also had it's opinion. Nobody is right or wrong here, just the way it is. OKCupid was well within it's rights to denounce firefox - just like brendan was within his rights to support prop8.
• nsxwolf 13y ago
  I fear this is a sign of things to come. Today it is CEOs, tomorrow it is someone lesser. Eventually it will reach the common worker. Have an incorrect viewpoint on anything? Better keep quiet if you want to be able to take care of your family.
• babesh 13y ago
  JavaScript is a utterly horrible language. How could you let someone who designed that monstrosity become your CTO much less your CEO?
• enthdegree 13y ago
  FireCEO GayFox
• beefsack 13y ago
  Was it not an option to make a public statement to back down on the stance? I can't help but feel this is entirely unpragmatic.
• gred 13y ago
  This is astounding to me. In an industry which claims to be a meritocracy, at a nonprofit pledged to promoting openness, a legend is no longer allowed to contribute because he dares to agree with the majority of his fellow Californians on a political issue, on his own time, with his own money. For shame.
  • dragonwriter 13y ago
    > a legend is no longer allowed to contribute Er, since when is Eich not "allowed to contribute"? > because he dares to agree with the majority of his fellow Californians on a political issue, on his own time, with his own money. Either he voluntarily stepped down (in which case, the reason stated is clearly wrong) or he was forced to stepped down by the Mozilla Corporation board and/or the Mozilla Foundation (which owns Mozilla Corp), in which case its a lot more likely that the reason is that they lost confidence in his ability to lead because of the way he responded to the controversy, rather than that they were upset by his political stand. In any case, there is very little basis for the characterization you present.
• AnotherDesigner 13y ago
  What we've learned today: Most commenters on Hacker News don't know what freedom of speech is. They also don't understand, or maybe don't care, about the responsibility of society to protect minority groups. They also haven't read the bible or understand any of the history behind religion-based attacks on gay rights. I had no idea we had so many Fox News viewers here.
• pistle 13y ago
  This contents me. Good choice Eich.
• vain 13y ago
  If OKCupid are against Brendan for his stance on gay marriage, they need to stop using javascript. Brendan Eich invented javascript.
• fakeanon 13y ago
  >Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all. _Unless one of your cultural or religious views is that marriage is between one man and one woman._ We're inclusive of everyone! Unless you voted for something we don't like... I'm not saying you should hire anybody, but don't pretend like you will then don't.
• m-photonic 13y ago
  Another day, another demonstration that the loudest voices on any given issue are never those that are most nuanced. The squeaky wheel gets the grease indeed.
• GnwbZHiU 13y ago
  The bigots win. I will stop using Firefox now.
• lohankin 13y ago
  HN, my congratulations! You managed to destroy a talented person for having a view different from yours. All under the flag of tolerance. Next destination: Gulag. You are almost there. Why is it OK for him to be CTO if he is a people's enemy? Nor can he go to any other place, regardless of position other than a janitor, and even that I'm not sure. "10 years of corrective labor without the right of correspondence" - does it say something to you?
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• ryanwhitney 13y ago
  Let's watch a speech by Tim Cook. http://business.time.com/2013/12/15/apple-ceo-tim-cook-gives-remarkable-speech-on-gay-rights-racism/ http://business.time.com/2013/12/15/apple-ceo-tim-cook-gives... A quote he mentions: "Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance." This is progress. This is the exact opposite of Eich's actions. Sure, he stood up for his "ideal" and didn't back down, but he objectively hurt others. Opinions, fine. But Eich took actions to hold others back. Along with those who tried to deny interracial marriage in the past, he stands on the wrong side of history. There is no lynch mob--just other folks on the internet who have the right to speak against those committing actions of hatred. "Basic human rights. Basic human dignity."
• drawkbox 13y ago
  This is all wrong. Brendan was wrong, however others were wrong essentially forcing him out. I feel Mozilla will lose some in this, taking a few self-inflicted wounds because they are open and that is unfortunate. It is the reason CEOs are plastic. Part of Mozilla's culture is now throwing someone who helped build it up under the bus. Yes his personal beliefs may be dated on this one issue, lots of people are on the wrong side of the issue but it had nothing to do with his contributions to Mozilla. This makes me more disappointed in Mozilla just when Firefox is really killing it with gaming. Should a person's life work be wrecked because of one bad choice? Social changes of that magnitude will have people on the wrong side of the wave for a time, it takes time to educate. I think this is the wrong way to educate, it feels a little bit like a witch hunt.
  • blisterpeanuts 13y ago
    Definitely the wrong way to educate. It sends the wrong message. For a lot of people, it has exposed the ugly side of political correctness and the cowardice of the organization, that it would toss overboard one of its founders.
• tn13 13y ago
  This is bad. Not just for Mozilla and tech community but also for LGBT community. LGBT community's witch hunt reflects less on Eich but more on the LGBR community who will now be viewed as "risky recruits".
• tn13 13y ago
  So if I support Gun ownership and my CEO has supported some Gun Ban movement should I leave the organization or should I demand that the CEO step down ? I wish Mozilla showed some balls here.
• gms 13y ago
  For those who supported this, I am curious for your answers to these questions: 1) Should Mozilla deny employment to programmers who are against gay marriage? Like your average programmer from Arab and Muslim countries. 2) If said programmer is allowed to be employed by Mozilla, are they also allowed to be promoted sometime after being hired? 3) If they are allowed to be promoted, what level should be the limit of promotion? Since obviously you disagree with them being CEO.
• _Simon 13y ago
  Disgusted with the treatment of Brendan Eich by the community. You guys bullied, slandered and libelled and individual. Your behaviour towards him is far worse than his views. As far as I'm concerned, Mozilla no longer exists. I'm not interested in anything that a organisation that supports this kind of community says or does. Fucking hypocrites, every last one of you.
• huehue 13y ago
  Making a great job for many years. Forced to step down by social justice warriors. Such is the dictatorship of political correctness. A scary world to live in. Learn from his mistake as it might happen to you. Today's witch hunt is about gay marriage, in ten years it could be polyamory, underage drug usage or being forced to wear a burqa. You just cannot predict.
• rasengan0 13y ago
  I guess your views are a part of your performance review.
• chappi42 13y ago
  "Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it"... Bla bla, shame on these platitudes! Bad times when a ceo no longer can act according to his opinion (in private). Reflects very badly upon Mozilla: no spine, get rid of Eich and talk about 'we are stronger with you involved'. Deeply disappointed (and fwiw i'm pro gay marriage).
• leommoore 13y ago
  I do not share Brendan's views but he is entitled to have them. People who target individuals because they do not have the sames views as them should be ashamed. Is this not what freedom is all about?
• clyderadcliffe 13y ago
  Really sad to see Brendan go, I work full time as JavaScript dev. So to a certain extent I owe my livelihood too him. Really sad to see him lose his livelihood. Sad for Mozilla too, in their time they did a lot of good. I am thankful for the work they did in setting the Internet free from IE. I don't believe in the kind of freedom Mozilla now stands for. I do not know Brendan's religious views. But I am a Christian, and as Christian I am opposed to gay marriage. I could not change my view on gay marriage without abandoning my faith. I could not read the Bible with any honesty and say it supports gay marriage. I cannot apologise for my view without apologising on God's behalf. Those demanding an apology from Brendan are perhaps in reality asking him to renounce his faith. By asking Brendan to step down, Mozilla has made a statement to me that as Christian that I am not welcome in their community. And by extensions nor are Muslims, Jews, Mormons, JWs etc. Is Mozilla destined to become an echo chamber for those who support gay marriage? Is freedom just freedom to agree? Sadly whoever becomes CEO now is now second best on technical merit.
  • dnr 13y ago
    The wonderful thing about living in a country with a separation of church and state is that you don't have to change your views! You're welcome to believe whatever you want, and even to talk about it! The only thing you have to do is not try to turn your beliefs into laws that affect other people, like people that don't share your religion. -- And for the record, many Christians, Muslims, Jews, and members of lots of other religious do support gay marriage. Please don't attempt to speak for billions of people all at once.
• pknerd 13y ago
  So freedom of expression is to support Gays but not to oppose them?