8 ms·

Politics are always a factor in every industry and every facet of life, it is naive to think otherwise, politics are what happens when a large enough group of p

by wfo 11y ago

Politics are always a factor in every industry and every facet of life, it is naive to think otherwise, politics are what happens when a large enough group of people have to be led, be it in a company or a country. As far as Eich is concerned there are three things to keep in mind: 1) He was the public face of the company, he was supposed to represent Mozilla's values; there was NO problem with Eich when he was an engineer or simple employee of the company 2) It was a non-profit dedicated to openness and freedom and inclusion on the internet 3) He refused to qualify or repudiate his hate speech. It would be like appointing someone who had fought against multiracial drinking fountains the head of the ACLU. Organization over. Really it's the fault of the board who selected him without a thorough vetting. Hateful and publicly expressed views like that have no place in the public face of any inclusive organization; knowing your leader and boss wants to take your rights away because he doesn't approve of who you have sex with always creates a hostile work environment. They were just able to do something about it because Mozilla stands for something and operates based on principles rather than a top-down dictatorship like most corporations. And honestly if he had explained how he planned on reconciling his hateful views with managing gay employees and their marriages, etc. he may have been allowed to stay.

orionblastar 11y ago
True I thought he did apologize and Mozilla supported GLBT rights and same sex marriages. But it was not enough to end the boycott. I could be mistaken. https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ When I attended the University of Phoenix in 2005, we were taught that to support same sex marriages because it would become legal in most states and we'd get in trouble if we didn't. That GLBT people might be key employees and that diversity is a good thing. So if you have religious beliefs against gay marriage, support gay marriage anyway. Eich has religious beliefs against gay marriage and donated to a charity that tried to strike down a gay marriage law in California. Those donations were made public. We're going to see more of this as people hold religious beliefs that don't believe in gay marriage. Many religions are going to have to change.
- creationix 11y ago
  "Many religions are going to have to change" Pause and think about this for a moment. If you believed that there really was a God in heaven who spoke with you and has revealed to you the purposes of live and the purpose of marriage, a God who created the world, gave you life and offers eternal riches in the next life. If you really believed this, would you bend to social pressure because political winds have shifted against some of the teachings of your God? If a church bends to social pressure then it's a fake. Pay close attention to the ones that act like politicians and say whatever makes them popular and look at the ones who stick to their beliefs. We shouldn't punish people for believing what they believe! You can try to reason with people and have civil discourse and explain your position. But do it without resorting to straw-man attacks, ad-hominim attacks and blatant false accusations in order to garner the mobs against them. We shouldn't drive away would-be allies simply because they have a diverse perspective. We should welcome their diversity and utilize their wisdom and experience. Diversity is a good thing. This is why it's important we don't drive out everyone. This means to protect the rights of the gays and the religious.
BrendanEich 11y ago
FYI, I co-founded Mozilla, helped spin it out of AOL, picked the founding team that did Firefox and Thunderbird, led them as chief architect and then long-term CTO, and finally led all of Engineering as Senior Vice President. That you wrote "an engineer or simple employee" shows some lack of familiarity with the history. Also, at what point prior to my taking CEO was I "ok" as a boss and leader? As for "repudiate his hate speech", I never uttered hate speech. A donation in favor of Prop 8 is not on its face "hate speech" by any legal or sane definition of the phrase. Nice try, though. As for "take your rights away", that's also a disputed matter of definition, not some ground truth to assume because you heard it somewhere. California had Domestic Partner law to grant certain positive rights already granted to Conjugal Marriage. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_Califo.... That wasn't enough, but many people including me, for religious and other reasons, do not agree on redefining marriage as the best solution to any remaining inequities. To turn this history into "an engineer or simple employee" and "hate speech" and me as CEO out to "take your rights" is grotesquely misleading.
- BobNNN 11y ago
  You continue to evade the fact that, yes, you contributed money to a campaign to remove the right of marriage and to dissolve the marriages of thousands of Californians. You contributed to a campaign that demonized gay people as a threat to children.
  - BrendanEich 11y ago
    A green HN account, whee! Just for others looking on who don't share your animus and weak grasp of the truth: No marriage was dissolved by Prop 8 -- _ex post facto_ law is unconstitutional. Domestic Partnership remained the option for anyone seeking the positive rights enumerated by law. No campaign to which I donated demonized gay people as a threat to children. You perhaps heard an echo (possibly from M. Signorile) of the first version of a revised Slate piece by Mark Joseph Stern: http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/04/04/brendan_eich_supported_prop_8_which_was_worse_than_you_remember.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/04/04/brendan_eich_s... This piece had to be updated with a correction at the bottom: "Update, April 23, 2014: This post has been updated to clarify that the organization to which Brendan Eich donated money produced only the first of these ads. The other three were produced by other organizations within the same pro-Prop 8 coalition." Of course, many people did not read the update. Some still insist that the original was right, facts be damned. I just watched all of those videos (including the three I did not fund), and none of them demonized gays as a threat to children. Nope -- parental rights to education of their grade-school-age children does not equal demonizing gays as threats. Let's have a stand-up argument about education rights if that's what you meant, not a cheap lie to preempt debate by painting opponents as demonizers. Repeating easily-refuted falsehoods to defame me from green HN accounts simply isn't going to work. But a green HN account is itself continuing "to evade" a straight-up, real-name-to-real-name debate. Do better, or do something else.

by wfo 11y ago

orionblastar 11y ago

True I thought he did apologize and Mozilla supported GLBT rights and same sex marriages. But it was not enough to end the boycott. I could be mistaken. https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ When I attended the University of Phoenix in 2005, we were taught that to support same sex marriages because it would become legal in most states and we'd get in trouble if we didn't. That GLBT people might be key employees and that diversity is a good thing. So if you have religious beliefs against gay marriage, support gay marriage anyway. Eich has religious beliefs against gay marriage and donated to a charity that tried to strike down a gay marriage law in California. Those donations were made public. We're going to see more of this as people hold religious beliefs that don't believe in gay marriage. Many religions are going to have to change.

creationix 11y ago
"Many religions are going to have to change" Pause and think about this for a moment. If you believed that there really was a God in heaven who spoke with you and has revealed to you the purposes of live and the purpose of marriage, a God who created the world, gave you life and offers eternal riches in the next life. If you really believed this, would you bend to social pressure because political winds have shifted against some of the teachings of your God? If a church bends to social pressure then it's a fake. Pay close attention to the ones that act like politicians and say whatever makes them popular and look at the ones who stick to their beliefs. We shouldn't punish people for believing what they believe! You can try to reason with people and have civil discourse and explain your position. But do it without resorting to straw-man attacks, ad-hominim attacks and blatant false accusations in order to garner the mobs against them. We shouldn't drive away would-be allies simply because they have a diverse perspective. We should welcome their diversity and utilize their wisdom and experience. Diversity is a good thing. This is why it's important we don't drive out everyone. This means to protect the rights of the gays and the religious.

BrendanEich 11y ago

FYI, I co-founded Mozilla, helped spin it out of AOL, picked the founding team that did Firefox and Thunderbird, led them as chief architect and then long-term CTO, and finally led all of Engineering as Senior Vice President. That you wrote "an engineer or simple employee" shows some lack of familiarity with the history. Also, at what point prior to my taking CEO was I "ok" as a boss and leader? As for "repudiate his hate speech", I never uttered hate speech. A donation in favor of Prop 8 is not on its face "hate speech" by any legal or sane definition of the phrase. Nice try, though. As for "take your rights away", that's also a disputed matter of definition, not some ground truth to assume because you heard it somewhere. California had Domestic Partner law to grant certain positive rights already granted to Conjugal Marriage. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_Califo.... That wasn't enough, but many people including me, for religious and other reasons, do not agree on redefining marriage as the best solution to any remaining inequities. To turn this history into "an engineer or simple employee" and "hate speech" and me as CEO out to "take your rights" is grotesquely misleading.

BobNNN 11y ago
You continue to evade the fact that, yes, you contributed money to a campaign to remove the right of marriage and to dissolve the marriages of thousands of Californians. You contributed to a campaign that demonized gay people as a threat to children.
- BrendanEich 11y ago
  A green HN account, whee! Just for others looking on who don't share your animus and weak grasp of the truth: No marriage was dissolved by Prop 8 -- _ex post facto_ law is unconstitutional. Domestic Partnership remained the option for anyone seeking the positive rights enumerated by law. No campaign to which I donated demonized gay people as a threat to children. You perhaps heard an echo (possibly from M. Signorile) of the first version of a revised Slate piece by Mark Joseph Stern: http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/04/04/brendan_eich_supported_prop_8_which_was_worse_than_you_remember.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/04/04/brendan_eich_s... This piece had to be updated with a correction at the bottom: "Update, April 23, 2014: This post has been updated to clarify that the organization to which Brendan Eich donated money produced only the first of these ads. The other three were produced by other organizations within the same pro-Prop 8 coalition." Of course, many people did not read the update. Some still insist that the original was right, facts be damned. I just watched all of those videos (including the three I did not fund), and none of them demonized gays as a threat to children. Nope -- parental rights to education of their grade-school-age children does not equal demonizing gays as threats. Let's have a stand-up argument about education rights if that's what you meant, not a cheap lie to preempt debate by painting opponents as demonizers. Repeating easily-refuted falsehoods to defame me from green HN accounts simply isn't going to work. But a green HN account is itself continuing "to evade" a straight-up, real-name-to-real-name debate. Do better, or do something else.