Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 3rd Apr 2014 19:40 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones

Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn't live up to it. We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it's because we haven't stayed true to ourselves.

We didn’t act like you'd expect Mozilla to act. We didn't move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We're sorry. We must do better.

Brendan Eich has chosen to step down from his role as CEO. He's made this decision for Mozilla and our community.

The only sensible move.

Thread beginning with comment 586071
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by quackalist
by hussam on Thu 3rd Apr 2014 20:12 UTC in reply to "Comment by quackalist"
hussam
Member since:
2006-08-17

The politically correct thought police have won yet again...liberal fascism in action.

In real life, when you represent a company, you should always be neutral. This is a co-founder of Mozilla.
He should have the level of professionalism to be neutral and diplomatic.
That means saying "I endorse gay marriage", "I am against gay marriage", or any opinion about a social issue are things he should not be making publicly.
Yes, it is not fair but real life is not fair. You compromise for your job.

Edited 2014-04-03 20:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by quackalist
by qbast on Thu 3rd Apr 2014 21:49 in reply to "RE: Comment by quackalist"
qbast Member since:
2010-02-08

He was not publicly saying anything. Some asshole dug out names of everybody who donated to Prop 8 and used it to start a witch hunt. It passed with 52% majority, so I guess there are lots of people left to harass.

Reply Parent Score: 17

RE[3]: Comment by quackalist
by Machster on Fri 4th Apr 2014 13:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by quackalist"
Machster Member since:
2007-05-15

He was not publicly saying anything.


Exactly. He did not apologize or deny that he held the same opinions even though those violate Mozilla's stated company policy.

It passed with 52% majority, so I guess there are lots of people left to harass.


If you act to take away someone's civil rights you have to deal with the consequences. You reap what you sow.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by quackalist
by backdoc on Fri 4th Apr 2014 16:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by quackalist"
backdoc Member since:
2006-01-14

He was not publicly saying anything. Some asshole dug out names of everybody who donated to Prop 8 and used it to start a witch hunt. It passed with 52% majority, so I guess there are lots of people left to harass.


Exactly, and he had the same position that big-O had at the very same time. Where were the cry babies then? Where's the outrage?

So, now, we're not entitled to think independently and have our own opinions because it might be different than someone else's.

The hypocrisy and irony is just astounding. Intolerant people wanted him to resign because they thought he was intolerant.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by quackalist
by Vanders on Thu 3rd Apr 2014 23:27 in reply to "RE: Comment by quackalist"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

In real life, when you represent a company, you should always be neutral. This is a co-founder of Mozilla.

That's demonstratively untrue. Meg Whitman ran for office before being appointed as CEO of HP. No one has vilified her for any position she took during her candidacy.

How much money have guys like Sergey Brin & Tim Cook donated to various political causes?

Eich's problem was he donated to a cause that's currently a political hot potato, and happened to be in a high profile position which overlaps heavily with various SJW types. So he was vilified.

I don't agree with his views at all. I totally agree with anybodies right to say "Hey you know what, I think this guy is a dick". What I don't agree with is this weird creeping thought-crime, where we should vilify a person simply because we disagree with something they said or did. That's completely bizarre, and a horrible precedent for the future.

Reply Parent Score: 18

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

Why are people acting as if this is the first time someone has had to step down (or didn't get to take a position in the first place or any other number of actions) because their supporters, employees, customers, communities disagreed with their views? This happens all the time, every day. This is no first. This is no precedent.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by quackalist
by Machster on Fri 4th Apr 2014 13:35 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by quackalist"
Machster Member since:
2007-05-15

What I don't agree with is this weird creeping thought-crime, where we should vilify a person simply because we disagree with something they said or did. That's completely bizarre, and a horrible precedent for the future.


This isn't a simple matter of a disagreement of opinion. The CEO of a company, that prides itself on equality, actively worked to remove the civil rights of group of people. Let's talk about unconstitutionality and hypocrisy rather than "creeping thought-crime".

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by quackalist
by fche on Fri 4th Apr 2014 13:58 in reply to "RE: Comment by quackalist"
fche Member since:
2009-09-22

How come neutrality (silence) is only expected of people on one particular side of the political/cultural issue?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by quackalist
by bbman on Fri 4th Apr 2014 18:10 in reply to "RE: Comment by quackalist"
bbman Member since:
2014-04-04

This is pure garbage that you are spouting. Everyone is entitled to their rights. If he had been PRO homosexual no one would have had an issue with it or at least gone as far as they did with him. I'm sorry if you disagree you are out and out wrong and live in a funny and special place made up of clouds and pink bunnys with purple dots. Why is it that the minority can have their way and yet a majority can't? Why is it that only one side is allowed their wants???

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Comment by quackalist
by -pekr- on Fri 4th Apr 2014 20:18 in reply to "RE: Comment by quackalist"
-pekr- Member since:
2006-03-28

This is really unbelievable. You know where the real democracy ends? When a person can't freely express his/her point of view, using own words, which describe the reality as he/she can see it. To hell with the political correctness. This leftist's fascism and fanatism is a damage to the western society, not its strength. My friend is a gay, and I respect him, but any such over-reactions of some fanatical idiots should be avoided and surely not admired.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You know where the real democracy ends? When a person can't freely express his/her point of view, using own words, which describe the reality as he/she can see it. To hell with the political correctness. This leftist's fascism and fanatism is a damage to the western society, not its strength.


He can freely express his opinion all he wants. Nobody - not the people, not Mozilla, not the government - is preventing him from doing so. Where do you get the idea that his freedom of speech is threatened or limited? Can he not say what he wants?

Similarly - and this is the other side of the coin you apparently do not understand - Mozilla, its employees, and its customers, are ALSO free to say what they want. And they have made it very clear that they do not wish to be led by, or use products by a company led by, a bigot. That is ALSO freedom of speech.

What has happened right here is a free society working exactly as intended. The man has freely expressed his opinions - but so has his employer, his subordinates, and his customers. And, as is proper in a free society, the government has had absolutely zero involvement.

How is this NOT freedom of speech at its most beautiful?

Edited 2014-04-04 20:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2