4 ms·

I disagree that it's a valid question. I don't think it was a valid question in Eich's case, either. If there had been any suggestion that Eich had discrimina

I disagree that it's a valid question. I don't think it was a valid question in Eich's case, either. If there had been any suggestion that Eich had discriminated against any Mozilla employee on the basis of his opinions about homosexuality, that would be a completely different matter, and I would totally support his ousting. But nothing like that ever came out -- I read every blog post on the subject that I could find -- and Eich pledged to abide by Mozilla's diversity policy. I understand why people had a hard time with the donation. I did too. The pro-Prop. 8 campaign was a river of vicious lies. My initial reaction was the same as a lot of other people's, and indeed I signed one of the online petitions calling for Eich's ouster, which I now regret. But eventually it became clear that he really did keep his politics out of the office -- there was not a shred of evidence to the contrary. He should have been allowed to remain CEO.

zorpner 12y ago
He should have been allowed to remain CEO. It's old hat at this point and likely not worth rehashing, but the way I ended up looking at the problem that made the most sense to me was to look at it as a chain of events, and determine if there's any event in that chain that I'd want to prevent. Obviously I don't want to prevent people from choosing which products they use; I don't want to prevent people from discussing their product choices with each other; I don't want to prevent these discussions from happening publicly; I don't want to prevent companies from acting based on public and internal opinion. Eich's departure, for better or worse, was at the end of a chain of reactions that we don't only need to accept, but defend -- an essential consequence of a system that we want to perpetuate.
- ScottBurson 12y ago
  I'm not opposed to people expressing their opinions. I'm simply explaining why I disagree.
masklinn 12y ago
> But eventually it became clear that he really did keep his politics out of the office Eich was CEO for less than 2 weeks (March 24 to April 3rd)... > He should have been allowed to remain CEO. Technically he was. The board didn't move against him, Eich resigned.
- ScottBurson 12y ago
  > Eich was CEO for less than 2 weeks (March 24 to April 3rd)... But he was hardly a newcomer to Mozilla, having been CTO for years. I believe I read that he had also participated in the drafting of Mozilla's diversity policy. And as far as him being "allowed" to remain CEO, I was really speaking about public opinion, not about the board's actions, though I am extremely unimpressed with the way the board handled the whole thing. He claimed that he had initially been uninterested in the position, and they talked him into taking it. Given that, they should have supported him a lot more than they did, although they might still in the end have felt their hand was forced.

zorpner 12y ago

He should have been allowed to remain CEO. It's old hat at this point and likely not worth rehashing, but the way I ended up looking at the problem that made the most sense to me was to look at it as a chain of events, and determine if there's any event in that chain that I'd want to prevent. Obviously I don't want to prevent people from choosing which products they use; I don't want to prevent people from discussing their product choices with each other; I don't want to prevent these discussions from happening publicly; I don't want to prevent companies from acting based on public and internal opinion. Eich's departure, for better or worse, was at the end of a chain of reactions that we don't only need to accept, but defend -- an essential consequence of a system that we want to perpetuate.

ScottBurson 12y ago
I'm not opposed to people expressing their opinions. I'm simply explaining why I disagree.

masklinn 12y ago

> But eventually it became clear that he really did keep his politics out of the office Eich was CEO for less than 2 weeks (March 24 to April 3rd)... > He should have been allowed to remain CEO. Technically he was. The board didn't move against him, Eich resigned.

ScottBurson 12y ago
> Eich was CEO for less than 2 weeks (March 24 to April 3rd)... But he was hardly a newcomer to Mozilla, having been CTO for years. I believe I read that he had also participated in the drafting of Mozilla's diversity policy. And as far as him being "allowed" to remain CEO, I was really speaking about public opinion, not about the board's actions, though I am extremely unimpressed with the way the board handled the whole thing. He claimed that he had initially been uninterested in the position, and they talked him into taking it. Given that, they should have supported him a lot more than they did, although they might still in the end have felt their hand was forced.