12 ms·

My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. The main method of protest was to boycott Firefox.

My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. The main method of protest was to boycott Firefox. Yet this was a stupid thing to do, because Firefox is the result of over a decade of wide-scale community effort, all done on a non-profit basis, and has been instrumental in advancing web standards. Firefox was also the initial spark that got us out of the stagnation caused by IE6. By boycotting Firefox, people were punishing pretty much everyone except Eich. A much more blunt statement would have been to boycott JavaScript, something Eich was directly responsible for. Of course, that would actually require some effort in a major overhaul of one's browsing habits. Then it was OKCupid just blatantly jumping on the bandwagon, encouraging Firefox users to leave their browser, all in an absolutely farcical attempt to assert their moral superiority. Finally, most people don't seem to be aware that gay marriage is often a red herring in general, and the topic of marriage privatization is rarely discussed in public. But that's heading towards my personal views.

bhauer 12y ago
I thoroughly agree. In fact, I wrote very similar sentiments in a blog entry in April [1]. The calls for a boycott of Mozilla and Firefox in particular from left and right were embarrassing for our society. Mozilla was wrongly targeted to make a political point and as a fan of Mozilla, I found that disappointing, especially considering Mozilla as an organization is among the most well-aligned with the rights of individuals. [1] http://tiamat.tsotech.com/do-not-punish-mozilla http://tiamat.tsotech.com/do-not-punish-mozilla
rimantas 12y ago
Actually I doubt there is anything left from the Mozilla that brought the initial Firefox in todays Mozilla. All the good things did happen a decade and more ago. And if organisation does not take dare deciding whom to put in the top position it is ok to bear consequences.
- vezzy-fnord 12y ago
  Yes, but it's not like Firefox exists in a closed company vacuum or anything.
tbrownaw 12y ago
My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. Causing indiscriminate collateral damage (and using various arguments to deflect blame onto your enemies) until people submit to your whims is a long and time-honored tradition (for example, terrorists). Vicious attacks against those who (appear to be about to) "leave the fold" are also long and time-honored tradition (for example, apostasy in religious-ruled countries). Given that They (the people doing the protesting) decided that Eich's political actions made him a "them", and that They considered Mozilla to be an "us", it was perfectly reasonable for Them to (1) attack Mozilla for associating with Eich, and (2) attack anyone associated with Eich until Eich was forced to submit to Them (in this case, to Go Away). So no, the problem is that people decided to suddenly target one individual for protest over a years-old used-to-be-majority political opinion.
- flatdeviant 12y ago
  I was about to make the same comparison. To me, this is enabled by social media. This uproar against Eich wouldn't have been viral if it weren't for Twitter, Reddit, and others. The people who complained used tactics akin to bullying: "do what I want (fire Brendan Eich), or else I'll make much noise as I can, and drag your brand through the mud". The backlash was driven by self-righteousness ("my beliefs are superior to Eich's") and contempt ("his beliefs hurt people, so he isn't entitled to them"). These feelings are timeless and have been common throughout history. The problem is that it's easy for them to quickly spread on Twitter, and then get blown even further out of proportion, either by being mentioned on 24/7 TV channels, or, here, because of OKCupid pulling a marketing move by supporting the backlash. And overall, the effect is that some opinions and subjects are sadly becoming taboo, and people have to be politically correct or risk having their lives ruined. This happened to Eich, it happened with Donglegate [1], and it will happen again. The common theme in these stories is social media. [1]: http://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-overreaction-and-everyone-pays/ http://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-o...
zorpner 12y ago
By boycotting Firefox, people were punishing pretty much everyone except Eich. This would seem not to be the case, based on the things that happened.

bhauer 12y ago

I thoroughly agree. In fact, I wrote very similar sentiments in a blog entry in April [1]. The calls for a boycott of Mozilla and Firefox in particular from left and right were embarrassing for our society. Mozilla was wrongly targeted to make a political point and as a fan of Mozilla, I found that disappointing, especially considering Mozilla as an organization is among the most well-aligned with the rights of individuals. [1] http://tiamat.tsotech.com/do-not-punish-mozilla http://tiamat.tsotech.com/do-not-punish-mozilla

rimantas 12y ago

Actually I doubt there is anything left from the Mozilla that brought the initial Firefox in todays Mozilla. All the good things did happen a decade and more ago. And if organisation does not take dare deciding whom to put in the top position it is ok to bear consequences.

vezzy-fnord 12y ago
Yes, but it's not like Firefox exists in a closed company vacuum or anything.

tbrownaw 12y ago

My main beef with the Eich case wasn't the fact that people protested his decision, it was how they did it. Causing indiscriminate collateral damage (and using various arguments to deflect blame onto your enemies) until people submit to your whims is a long and time-honored tradition (for example, terrorists). Vicious attacks against those who (appear to be about to) "leave the fold" are also long and time-honored tradition (for example, apostasy in religious-ruled countries). Given that They (the people doing the protesting) decided that Eich's political actions made him a "them", and that They considered Mozilla to be an "us", it was perfectly reasonable for Them to (1) attack Mozilla for associating with Eich, and (2) attack anyone associated with Eich until Eich was forced to submit to Them (in this case, to Go Away). So no, the problem is that people decided to suddenly target one individual for protest over a years-old used-to-be-majority political opinion.

flatdeviant 12y ago
I was about to make the same comparison. To me, this is enabled by social media. This uproar against Eich wouldn't have been viral if it weren't for Twitter, Reddit, and others. The people who complained used tactics akin to bullying: "do what I want (fire Brendan Eich), or else I'll make much noise as I can, and drag your brand through the mud". The backlash was driven by self-righteousness ("my beliefs are superior to Eich's") and contempt ("his beliefs hurt people, so he isn't entitled to them"). These feelings are timeless and have been common throughout history. The problem is that it's easy for them to quickly spread on Twitter, and then get blown even further out of proportion, either by being mentioned on 24/7 TV channels, or, here, because of OKCupid pulling a marketing move by supporting the backlash. And overall, the effect is that some opinions and subjects are sadly becoming taboo, and people have to be politically correct or risk having their lives ruined. This happened to Eich, it happened with Donglegate [1], and it will happen again. The common theme in these stories is social media. [1]: http://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-overreaction-and-everyone-pays/ http://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-o...

zorpner 12y ago

By boycotting Firefox, people were punishing pretty much everyone except Eich. This would seem not to be the case, based on the things that happened.