5 ms·

The whole Mozilla thing is a little bitter-sweet for me. I'm glad that we've progressed to the point where actively working to deny another person equal rights

The whole Mozilla thing is a little bitter-sweet for me. I'm glad that we've progressed to the point where actively working to deny another person equal rights is no longer acceptable, but I wonder if this was really the best use of our time and "outrage." Eich wasn't an activist or even a huge contributor as far as we know. I support sending a peaceful, voluntary message - but in retrospect, I think we sent it to the wrong person and company. The article makes some good points and some weak arguments (the Obama comparison is bizarre), but the author makes little distinction between holding a differing view and contributing to causes that (IMO) encourage discrimination and unjust inequality. In other words, I think it's fair game to boycott and protest supporters of anti-gay-marriage bills, but we (myself included) should have focused on something with greater impact - a "real" bad guy. There are hundreds of politicians who are actively working against equal rights, and a lot of big money going to them and pro-discrimination PACs. For those who support equality in marriage, that's a better place to start.

Justsignedup 13y ago
I will only tolerate such behavior in one and only one instance: when the issue is a human rights violation. But where does it end? Do people start boycotting companies because one of their board members are not opposed to abortion? Do people start boycotting companies because the CEO feels that Michael Jackson was not a pedophile? In the end my favorite quote on free speech: "Sir, I disagree with you whole-heartedly, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Also, what if since then he has changed his mind? These things happen, people had wrong opinions and through argument have changed them.
- ChrisGaudreau 13y ago
  People do boycott companies due to abortion and lots of other things. That would be free speech.
  - Justsignedup 13y ago
    Good point. This seems like an interesting case.
- glesica 13y ago
  > "Sir, I disagree with you whole-heartedly, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Yes, but this applies to censorship. No one was censoring Eich or asking for him to be censored and, even more importantly, no one was asking for the government to step in. I support his right to be a bigot. I do not, however, want a bigot running an organization that is important to me, and I (and many others whose opinions matter far more than mine) said so (our right).
  - masklinn 13y ago
    > No one was censoring Eich or asking for him to be censored and, even more importantly, no one was asking for the government to step in. Many were not even asking for him to leave his post, just for him to disown his previous acts (acts, not beliefs) and maybe a comp (e.g. equivalent donation to anti-bullying orgs were floated around) as a show of good will.
    - Justsignedup 13y ago
      I guess he still feels that way. But the board may have decided that even an apology may still not quiet the mob in this instance.
  - sssilver 13y ago
    > I support his right to be a bigot According to Google, "bigotry" is defined as "having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others." I'm getting confused here, since English is not my native language -- but how's Eich a bigot, and the other side of the barricade not? In fact, according to that definition, how are the people who ousted him not the bigger bigots? Just wondering.
    - Justsignedup 13y ago
      Bigotry is usually referred to someone who puts down a group of people, based on their race, sexual orientation, sex, etc. Things that people cannot control: "I hate all left-handed people." In his case he was (at least partially) trying to deny a group of people (homosexuals and other derivatives) the right to Marry a same-sex partner and have equal protection under the law. Note this issue is similar to people protesting that a black man should not be allowed to legally marry a white woman just a few decades ago.
- thrownaway2424 13y ago
  This isn't about boycotting, it's about hiring and retention. If Mozilla can't hire people, they're fucked. If their CEO is perceived BY THE PEOPLE THEY WANT TO HIRE as a bit of an asshat, that's not good.
  - Justsignedup 13y ago
    Ditto for volunteers
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Also, what if since then he has changed his mind? Then you'd expect that to be one of the things addressed in the response once the issue is raised.

Justsignedup 13y ago

I will only tolerate such behavior in one and only one instance: when the issue is a human rights violation. But where does it end? Do people start boycotting companies because one of their board members are not opposed to abortion? Do people start boycotting companies because the CEO feels that Michael Jackson was not a pedophile? In the end my favorite quote on free speech: "Sir, I disagree with you whole-heartedly, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Also, what if since then he has changed his mind? These things happen, people had wrong opinions and through argument have changed them.

ChrisGaudreau 13y ago
People do boycott companies due to abortion and lots of other things. That would be free speech.
- Justsignedup 13y ago
  Good point. This seems like an interesting case.
glesica 13y ago
> "Sir, I disagree with you whole-heartedly, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Yes, but this applies to censorship. No one was censoring Eich or asking for him to be censored and, even more importantly, no one was asking for the government to step in. I support his right to be a bigot. I do not, however, want a bigot running an organization that is important to me, and I (and many others whose opinions matter far more than mine) said so (our right).
- masklinn 13y ago
  > No one was censoring Eich or asking for him to be censored and, even more importantly, no one was asking for the government to step in. Many were not even asking for him to leave his post, just for him to disown his previous acts (acts, not beliefs) and maybe a comp (e.g. equivalent donation to anti-bullying orgs were floated around) as a show of good will.
  - Justsignedup 13y ago
    I guess he still feels that way. But the board may have decided that even an apology may still not quiet the mob in this instance.
- sssilver 13y ago
  > I support his right to be a bigot According to Google, "bigotry" is defined as "having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others." I'm getting confused here, since English is not my native language -- but how's Eich a bigot, and the other side of the barricade not? In fact, according to that definition, how are the people who ousted him not the bigger bigots? Just wondering.
  - Justsignedup 13y ago
    Bigotry is usually referred to someone who puts down a group of people, based on their race, sexual orientation, sex, etc. Things that people cannot control: "I hate all left-handed people." In his case he was (at least partially) trying to deny a group of people (homosexuals and other derivatives) the right to Marry a same-sex partner and have equal protection under the law. Note this issue is similar to people protesting that a black man should not be allowed to legally marry a white woman just a few decades ago.
thrownaway2424 13y ago
This isn't about boycotting, it's about hiring and retention. If Mozilla can't hire people, they're fucked. If their CEO is perceived BY THE PEOPLE THEY WANT TO HIRE as a bit of an asshat, that's not good.
- Justsignedup 13y ago
  Ditto for volunteers
dragonwriter 13y ago
> Also, what if since then he has changed his mind? Then you'd expect that to be one of the things addressed in the response once the issue is raised.