4 ms·

To be frank, until this little exchange, I thought you were unfairly treated in the storm surrounding your contribution. I thought social media was mostly to b

by BobNNN 11y ago

To be frank, until this little exchange, I thought you were unfairly treated in the storm surrounding your contribution. I thought social media was mostly to blame and that a lot of folks treated you badly, mostly for their own publicity purposes. Were it not for the effect of internet hype, you'd probably still have your job, and the gay people who worked for you would just have to suck it up. Even after exposure to your personal beliefs and the sad little arguments you make against gay people, I still think you were mistreated and that social media is to blame, but I now also know you really are anti-gay. That wouldn't, of course, make you an anomaly in this country, especially in the ranks of CEOs (who skew conservative). It does put into perspective the support you received from some gay people at Mozilla. They had your back more than you had theirs.

BrendanEich 11y ago
I'm not anti-gay, as those Mozille people I worked with who had my back (and I had theirs as manager and leader) know. Your insistence that being against redefining marriage makes me "anti-gay" would make a lot of self-described gay people "anti-gay". I've heard this, of course: they're "self-hating" -- a disgusting, lazy, cheap shot -- also used against folks like Phil Weiss who are Jewish and critical of Israel. You are making an ad-hominem argument. Anathematizing may work inside your circle, but for people not fully on-side already, it blatantly dodges the unavoidable arguments about essential differences. Usually people do it to feel good and display status to peers. If you're serious about wanting to argue (no need; we both have other things to do, I'm sure), then drop the "sad little" non-argument comments labeling me with a slur-term for which you have no evidence other than a circular argument: that I'm against redefining marriage because I'm anti-gay, and I'm anti-gay because I'm against redefining marriage.
- BrendanEich 11y ago
  One last thing. You wrote: "Were it not for the effect of internet hype, you'd probably still have your job, and the gay people who worked for you would just have to suck it up." Suck what up? That, after Prop 8 was nullified (not enforced, but let's not look closely), and now after _Obergefell_, when I am indeed among the losing dissenters, people I might have worked with longer at Mozilla would have to suck up that I in fact dissent -- and yet without my treating anyone badly? So it's all about thought control, in the end? Disagreeing on redefining marriage looks like a metaphysical argument.
  - DonHopkins 11y ago
    So explain why you still to this day refuse to explain you reasons for voting for Proposition 8, Brendan? Better yet, will you please FINALLY explain you reasons for voting for Proposition 8? Or just refer to the parts of Scalia's arguments that you agree with? Thank you!
    - BrendanEich 11y ago
      Don, what is it with you? We met once when you interviewed at Netscape, yet I have a very long log of hate-messages, truly hateful stuff, that you've put on my facebook content or sent me there sporadically over the years, including from your fake accounts (one was just suspended). You are acting the bully and bigot. Ok, I can take it, but it doesn't help anyone, certainly not you. What's the point?
      - DonHopkins 11y ago
        Since you asked, the point still is: So explain why you still to this day refuse to explain you reasons for voting for Proposition 8, Brendan?
        BrendanEich 11y ago
        Don, go read these two articles in full and you'll have the answer you already know and don't want to face, preferring to straw-man and spew abuse at me, and make me "the issue": http://discussingmarriage.org/ http://discussingmarriage.org/ http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/you-will-be-assimilated_969581.html http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/you-will-be-assimilat... Your abusive approach since 2012 when you learned of my donation leaves me very much not willing to walk you gently through the arguments that I'm sure you know already, as if you were approaching me in good faith. You are, and have been, approaching, detracting, and abuse-spewing (from fake FB accounts, even) in very bad faith. Find another target for your anger, or better yet: find some help.
        11y ago

by BobNNN 11y ago

BrendanEich 11y ago

I'm not anti-gay, as those Mozille people I worked with who had my back (and I had theirs as manager and leader) know. Your insistence that being against redefining marriage makes me "anti-gay" would make a lot of self-described gay people "anti-gay". I've heard this, of course: they're "self-hating" -- a disgusting, lazy, cheap shot -- also used against folks like Phil Weiss who are Jewish and critical of Israel. You are making an ad-hominem argument. Anathematizing may work inside your circle, but for people not fully on-side already, it blatantly dodges the unavoidable arguments about essential differences. Usually people do it to feel good and display status to peers. If you're serious about wanting to argue (no need; we both have other things to do, I'm sure), then drop the "sad little" non-argument comments labeling me with a slur-term for which you have no evidence other than a circular argument: that I'm against redefining marriage because I'm anti-gay, and I'm anti-gay because I'm against redefining marriage.

BrendanEich 11y ago
One last thing. You wrote: "Were it not for the effect of internet hype, you'd probably still have your job, and the gay people who worked for you would just have to suck it up." Suck what up? That, after Prop 8 was nullified (not enforced, but let's not look closely), and now after _Obergefell_, when I am indeed among the losing dissenters, people I might have worked with longer at Mozilla would have to suck up that I in fact dissent -- and yet without my treating anyone badly? So it's all about thought control, in the end? Disagreeing on redefining marriage looks like a metaphysical argument.
- DonHopkins 11y ago
  So explain why you still to this day refuse to explain you reasons for voting for Proposition 8, Brendan? Better yet, will you please FINALLY explain you reasons for voting for Proposition 8? Or just refer to the parts of Scalia's arguments that you agree with? Thank you!
  - BrendanEich 11y ago
    Don, what is it with you? We met once when you interviewed at Netscape, yet I have a very long log of hate-messages, truly hateful stuff, that you've put on my facebook content or sent me there sporadically over the years, including from your fake accounts (one was just suspended). You are acting the bully and bigot. Ok, I can take it, but it doesn't help anyone, certainly not you. What's the point?
    - DonHopkins 11y ago
      Since you asked, the point still is: So explain why you still to this day refuse to explain you reasons for voting for Proposition 8, Brendan?
      - BrendanEich 11y ago
        Don, go read these two articles in full and you'll have the answer you already know and don't want to face, preferring to straw-man and spew abuse at me, and make me "the issue": http://discussingmarriage.org/ http://discussingmarriage.org/ http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/you-will-be-assimilated_969581.html http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/you-will-be-assimilat... Your abusive approach since 2012 when you learned of my donation leaves me very much not willing to walk you gently through the arguments that I'm sure you know already, as if you were approaching me in good faith. You are, and have been, approaching, detracting, and abuse-spewing (from fake FB accounts, even) in very bad faith. Find another target for your anger, or better yet: find some help.
        11y ago