4 ms·

It's too bad and everyone lost out in the end. I was also angered by the donation, and disappointed in what had up until then been a personal hero of mine, but

It's too bad and everyone lost out in the end. I was also angered by the donation, and disappointed in what had up until then been a personal hero of mine, but even then I still respected Brendan Eich for his many contributions to not only web technology but my own life through Mozilla products and JavaScript. He could have done many things differently. He could not have taken the CEO position. He could have had a change of heart about his donation. There was also a bit of weirdness in his defense during the storm that struck me as tone deaf. In the end he stuck to his conviction, which might be admirable if his position wasn't about limiting the rights of others. I don't mind having leaders who respect people of all walks of life and the argument that criticizing intolerant individuals in leadership positions is a form of intolerance is a specious argument. Yet in the end we still lost a great person doing good things on behalf of everyone. Life is weird that way, it's not all black and white.

dodyg 12y ago
Ousting Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla is a big mistake. People who opposes gay marriage are not evil. This was the law of the land in the US since for ever until recently. For people to turn on him in supporting his belief is despicable. I am glad the tide is turning everywhere that gay marriage is being implemented widely but punishing people for their political actions is a dangerous slippery of slopes. Gay marriage issue is winning by changing people's mind one by one. There are tons of people that previously oppose to it. Heck even Obama 'evolved' on this issue. Are we going to revenge on them as well? ( What's next? Shall we fire pro-choice candidate as well? How about purging people that vote (Democratic/Republican) party? We must stop ousting people on a single issue.
- ossreality 12y ago
  Boo fucking who. Give me your laments for Rodger Sterling. Fucking yawn.
- te_chris 12y ago
  He never 'evolved' though. It says right there in the article, he never articulated a change of heart/mind, just that he was sorry he offended anyone - the ultimate non-apology, apology.
  - dodyg 12y ago
    He does not have to. It is his personal belief. We must not force him to renounce his believe in exchange for his job.
    - ralfn 12y ago
      It wasn't about his personal belief. He actively donated. He picked a side in what is still an ongoing globalized war for human rights. Secondly, freedom of speech does not entail freedom of societal consequences of speech. It just means the government can't punish you for being an asshole. It doesn't mean anyone is forced to hang out with assholes. Nor are we forced to use products of which appearantly funds end up trying to oppress other human beings. The answer to moral criticism of corporatism is always 'vote with your wallet'. Now you are saying we are not allowed to do just that? That we must treat every company equally irregardless of their political actions? (actions yes, not opinions) Also, the exact position of gay marriage in the US is completely irrelevant -- that notion alone testifies a misplaced arrogance. Mozilla operates in a very large globalized world. A world where in many countries gays are still oppressed -- and i don't mean in the you-cant-get-married-way but in the we-are-going-to-kill-you way. This is a large globalized war for human rights, and he picked sides. That has consequences. Here's a question: what if he contributed to Al Queda? He didn't fly those planes -- it's just freedom of speech, right? He should be able to be CEO of Mozilla, right? What an assholes we are if we would stop using Firefox because of that, right? I realize it's a straw-man argument. His actions are not on the same level. But it proves that the notion that political actions should be free of consequence is plain wrong. The whole point of political actions is that you want something to change. People who believe that change is for the worse, are free to fight you with any legal means including voting with their wallet or refusing to work for somebody who they perceive to be their moral enemy. Yes, that makes a person less qualified for certain types of jobs. It made sense for Mozilla to fire him for financial reasons -- but i kind of hope, moral reasons played a part as well. And he did choose to stick with his guns, so he lost a standoff he chose to be in.
      - Zancarius 12y ago
        > This is a large globalized war for human rights, and he picked sides. That has consequences. Here's a question: what if he contributed to Al Queda? He didn't fly those planes -- it's just freedom of speech, right? I think this is why it's difficult to have a sensible discussion on the matter, because the overwhelming stench of hyperbole frightens off everyone else but the flies.
jonahx 12y ago
> Yet in the end we still lost a great person doing good things on behalf of everyone. Life is weird that way, it's not all black and white. This seems an odd way to put it. Yes, people are full of contradictions we'd rather didn't exist, and politics especially seems to bring them out. The examples are endless, from great artists who are racists to religious leaders who make powerful social contributions but also molest children. One might equally say that "evil people can do beautiful things" or "great people can make poor choices." Either way, we're just fighting the cognitive dissonance of the two things co-existing when we wish they didn't. Which actually seems pretty black and white to me, and not weird at all.
maaku 12y ago
I am for gay marriage. But I also understand that not all oppositions to gay marriage are rooted in intolerance, bigotry, or hatred. I respect the right of Eich to express his opinion and donate funds within the confines of the law & his personal life. It's a shame that an organization like Mozilla couldn't understand the intricacies of this situation.
- ScottBurson 12y ago
  It wasn't the Mozilla organization that didn't understand -- it was a substantial fraction of their user base. With only a handful of exceptions, the Mozilla employees supported Eich, and felt he had already adequately demonstrated his commitment to inclusiveness. It was really a tidal wave of pressure from outside that forced their hand.

dodyg 12y ago

Ousting Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla is a big mistake. People who opposes gay marriage are not evil. This was the law of the land in the US since for ever until recently. For people to turn on him in supporting his belief is despicable. I am glad the tide is turning everywhere that gay marriage is being implemented widely but punishing people for their political actions is a dangerous slippery of slopes. Gay marriage issue is winning by changing people's mind one by one. There are tons of people that previously oppose to it. Heck even Obama 'evolved' on this issue. Are we going to revenge on them as well? ( What's next? Shall we fire pro-choice candidate as well? How about purging people that vote (Democratic/Republican) party? We must stop ousting people on a single issue.

ossreality 12y ago
Boo fucking who. Give me your laments for Rodger Sterling. Fucking yawn.
te_chris 12y ago
He never 'evolved' though. It says right there in the article, he never articulated a change of heart/mind, just that he was sorry he offended anyone - the ultimate non-apology, apology.
- dodyg 12y ago
  He does not have to. It is his personal belief. We must not force him to renounce his believe in exchange for his job.
  - ralfn 12y ago
    It wasn't about his personal belief. He actively donated. He picked a side in what is still an ongoing globalized war for human rights. Secondly, freedom of speech does not entail freedom of societal consequences of speech. It just means the government can't punish you for being an asshole. It doesn't mean anyone is forced to hang out with assholes. Nor are we forced to use products of which appearantly funds end up trying to oppress other human beings. The answer to moral criticism of corporatism is always 'vote with your wallet'. Now you are saying we are not allowed to do just that? That we must treat every company equally irregardless of their political actions? (actions yes, not opinions) Also, the exact position of gay marriage in the US is completely irrelevant -- that notion alone testifies a misplaced arrogance. Mozilla operates in a very large globalized world. A world where in many countries gays are still oppressed -- and i don't mean in the you-cant-get-married-way but in the we-are-going-to-kill-you way. This is a large globalized war for human rights, and he picked sides. That has consequences. Here's a question: what if he contributed to Al Queda? He didn't fly those planes -- it's just freedom of speech, right? He should be able to be CEO of Mozilla, right? What an assholes we are if we would stop using Firefox because of that, right? I realize it's a straw-man argument. His actions are not on the same level. But it proves that the notion that political actions should be free of consequence is plain wrong. The whole point of political actions is that you want something to change. People who believe that change is for the worse, are free to fight you with any legal means including voting with their wallet or refusing to work for somebody who they perceive to be their moral enemy. Yes, that makes a person less qualified for certain types of jobs. It made sense for Mozilla to fire him for financial reasons -- but i kind of hope, moral reasons played a part as well. And he did choose to stick with his guns, so he lost a standoff he chose to be in.
    - Zancarius 12y ago
      > This is a large globalized war for human rights, and he picked sides. That has consequences. Here's a question: what if he contributed to Al Queda? He didn't fly those planes -- it's just freedom of speech, right? I think this is why it's difficult to have a sensible discussion on the matter, because the overwhelming stench of hyperbole frightens off everyone else but the flies.

jonahx 12y ago

> Yet in the end we still lost a great person doing good things on behalf of everyone. Life is weird that way, it's not all black and white. This seems an odd way to put it. Yes, people are full of contradictions we'd rather didn't exist, and politics especially seems to bring them out. The examples are endless, from great artists who are racists to religious leaders who make powerful social contributions but also molest children. One might equally say that "evil people can do beautiful things" or "great people can make poor choices." Either way, we're just fighting the cognitive dissonance of the two things co-existing when we wish they didn't. Which actually seems pretty black and white to me, and not weird at all.

maaku 12y ago

I am for gay marriage. But I also understand that not all oppositions to gay marriage are rooted in intolerance, bigotry, or hatred. I respect the right of Eich to express his opinion and donate funds within the confines of the law & his personal life. It's a shame that an organization like Mozilla couldn't understand the intricacies of this situation.

ScottBurson 12y ago
It wasn't the Mozilla organization that didn't understand -- it was a substantial fraction of their user base. With only a handful of exceptions, the Mozilla employees supported Eich, and felt he had already adequately demonstrated his commitment to inclusiveness. It was really a tidal wave of pressure from outside that forced their hand.