The Next Mission

https://brendaneich.com/2014/04/the-next-mission/

by bpierre • 12 years ago

102 159 12 years ago

brendaneich.com

AdamTReineke• 12 years ago

Note that it says he's leaving Mozilla. That was the part missing from the Mozilla blog post, I believe.

ra88it• 12 years ago

There was plenty missing from that Mozilla post, but yeah, that was a big one!

lupatus3• 12 years ago

The solution to his network problem is probably something bizarre, like URbit (http://www.urbit.org/).

malnourish• 12 years ago

Was your account hijacked? I feel like this comment is unlike the rest of your comments.

lupatus3• 12 years ago

Nope, but thanks for the concern. I just have diverse interests, and think that the URbit project is quite strange and, as a result, sort of wonderful, IMO. For example, the algebra grammar for the Nock VM is fascinating for me. Moreover, I'm thinking of even using the C# port of Nock as a basis for bringing the rest of the project over to the Windows platform. My children take up a lot of time though.

lupatus3• 12 years ago

So, I just read through all of the other comments and see that I was the only person who didn't comment on Eich's ouster.

I think I understand now why you asked if my account was hijacked.

lawl• 12 years ago

I personally think it's sad that he's leaving

But I do have to say I think Brandon handled that really well and its definitely the right thing to do.

He had to step down eventually from mozilla to avoid further damage to the brand.

I think it's good he realized that and takes on new challenges.

protomyth2• 12 years ago

"He had to step down eventually from mozilla to avoid further damage to the brand."

In the other thread[1], I pointed out the damage will now continue via a second mob that seems to be sifting through all the other Mozilla employee's donations.

It happens a lot with this stuff in politics, and it sucks to high heaven having a group looking at everything you've ever donated.

1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7527579

awnird• 12 years ago

If you're not comfortable having people know you donated to hate groups, you might want to consider not donating to hate groups.

natural2194• 12 years ago

When I first heard the news, I was very angry and confused. After reading the Recode[1] writeup, it made a little more sense. The key point was the interviews where he refused to back down from his opinions or apologize. Some could find that respectable (and ultimately I do), but if you take on the position of CEO you need to be prepared to eat your words. It would have been very easy for him to just apologize and have everyone go back to their business. It's sad that people are so shallow, but that's just the way it is. I'm not upset that he was fired.

That said.

I have nothing but fury for the people instigating these kinds of senseless whichhunts. The key point here is that Eich has been CTO of Mozilla for years. CTO to CEO, while a big transition, is much smaller distance in executive representation than this controversy calls for. What I suspect is somebody in the Gawkerati saw a news piece on "somebody something new CEO of Mozilla", Googled his name, and dug up one political contribution from 5 years ago to create a controversy out of thin air. This kind of behavior sickens me -- not just the media publications that stir this pot, but the individual people boiling at the seams to crucify everyone with a different opinion. In 2014, people that contribute nothing to society other than digging up controversies have the power to bring down historic figures from pushing the envelope of innovation and opening the Web to allow to allow this very kind of expression.

At the end of the day, that is the ultimate irony. The technology that Branden worked his life on gave voice to those who destroyed him. The entire point of the web is to allow this kind of radical expression, and the moment we get it we use it to tear down and villanize the people who make it run.

Absolutely disgraceful.

If you're glad Eich resigned, I really only have one question for you: What do you hope to gain out of this? Do you think this will push the envelope toward greater acceptance of homosexuality? Is the idea that if we villify ideas enough and those that express them, they will eventually go away? Or does it just, I don't know, feel good?

[1]http://recode.net/2014/04/03/mozilla-co-founder-brendan-eich...

jamesaguilar2• 12 years ago

Is the idea that if we villify [homophobia] enough and those that express them, they will eventually go away?

Yes. It's been generally working with racism, sexism, classism, and a bunch of other bad -isms. The needs of oppressed groups outweigh the needs of their oppressors to express their views free of consequences.

PavlovsCat3• 12 years ago

The need of the oppressed groups for revenge after they more or less won? Really? Anyone who thinks like that has none of my support. Good luck with your fight, which could have been ours.

Also, there are plenty ways of having "consequences" without outright firing the guy, when from all we know he was doing his job just fine and brought exactly zero of his views about gay marriage into it.

visualR22• 12 years ago

Im not sure anti same sex marriage is the same as homophobia. Is it the wrong opinion, yes. But I wouldnt say being against same sex marriage is sufficient to make someone a homophobe.

natural2194• 12 years ago

reply: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7528088

HaloZero• 12 years ago

HIs appointment as CTO was in 2005, before the public disclosure of his 2008 support of Prop 8. The CEO is also a significantly larger role as they help dictate the vision of the company vs just the technological points of the company.

jeffgreco• 12 years ago

Blaming the "Gawkerati" seems ignorant of the overwhelming negative response that erupted pretty quickly on HN.

muyuu6• 12 years ago

All my life I've considered these goons talking about "evil homosexual lobby" and "reactionary liberals" to be basically wacko mad bigots. For the first time I find myself thinking there might be something to that.

When you find that your movement excuses means like lynching ("consequences" to your opinions and your freedom of speech) and persecution as long as they help your goals, then maybe your movement has lost the plot. I'm seeing truly scary comments that would have made McCarthyists cringe. In an environment where I'd never have expected them.

Borogove• 12 years ago

That's a really interesting definition of "lynching".

mikeash4• 12 years ago

That poor Mr. Eich, "lynched" by the mob. Well, not really lynched, he's still alive. But they beat him up pretty good! Oh, actually, he's fine. But his livelihood is destroyed and he'll never work in the industry again. Scratch that, apparently he has enough funds to take vacations while he decides what to do next. But hey, he doesn't get to be CEO of a big company! How terrible.

The injustice done to Mr. Eich is minor. He hasn't been killed or injured. He hasn't been blacklisted. He lost his job, in an industry where the average worker has to fight off recruiters with a stick, let alone someone like him.

Yes, there are consequences for your opinions when you become the public face of a large company, especially when that company is founded on some set of principles besides "make money". Those terrifying consequences involve not getting to be CEO anymore, and that's it. Big shock.

wonderzombie7• 12 years ago

Lynching? Please. There's no legal right to be a CEO. Nobody's bringing this guy up in front of a congressional committee. He exercised his constitutional right to donate money, and everyone else exercised their constitutional right to criticize a public figure.

You'll see truly scary comments anywhere and everywhere on the Internet. If you judge every movement by its most extreme, unhinged elements, then there are exactly zero sane or wholesome movements.

chasing4• 12 years ago

Wait, what? This is the fault of the "evil homosexual lobby" and "reactionary liberals?"

The guy's a bigot. (Unless he's made a statement disavowing his contribution in some way.) Being against equal rights for gay folks is being a bigot. Sorry.

If you don't want to catch shit for being a bigot when you're placed in a position of public power and trust, don't act like a bigot. Or give money to bigoted causes.

PedroBatista3• 12 years ago

It's disgusting what these people did to Brendan.

The guardians of the moral high ground and the champions of liberty and tolerance can't even stand next to someone with a different opinion about a specific subject. They are the same people that demand some guy to be fired because he made some joke on the radio, they paint themselves as happy all inclusive and kind fellas but are the worst kind of human being there is, highly educated, militant behaviour and not a single ounce of self evaluation.

How pathetic is this society when someone is persecuted because he chooses the "wrong" side, so of course he has to "pay".

Adding to the tragedy, many of these mindless souls don't have a clue who Brendan Eich is and the fundamental role he played in the last 20+ years. Ironically, many of them partly owe their careers to the man they just demanded to get fired.

Finally, this is a really dark day for Mozilla, Brendan was a HUGE part of Mozilla both in technical and cultural terms, in the next few years we will feel the consequences.

Even if he was just a regular guy, this is a tremendous injustice committed by the "always right" purest of the pure.

mikeash4• 12 years ago

Regarding your question, I won't say that I'm happy or sad, I've pretty much been following this with great fascination not taking either side. I'm very much against state discrimination against homosexuality, but Eich's "crime" in that respect was fairly minor. On the other hand, firing a CEO because he pressed the wrong button and got a buttload of people angry at him is entirely reasonable.

That said, I think this sort of thing does work. It's messy and far from ideal but it does push things in that direction:

"Is the idea that if we villify ideas enough and those that express them, they will eventually go away?"

In short... yes. Most people never change no matter what you do. The only way to really change things is to influence the next generation, so that they form different ("better") opinions than their parents. Children get a lot of their opinions from their parents, but they also get a lot of their opinions from the society they're in. If you force bigots to retreat from the public eye it does work to reduce bigotry in the very long term.

I'm not saying these tactics are a good idea (nor bad, I just make no stand on it at all), but they do work, slowly.

natural2194• 12 years ago

I think this topic -- how do we accelerate the decline in bigotry, esp. in regards to homosexuality -- is a hugely valuable topic to discuss.

I'm of the opinion that these kind of tactics probably aren't as effective as simply what I suggest: "letting the old people die". It's been shown that young people hugely disproportionatly support gay marriage, and support for Prop 8 is declining by a large percentage every year.

I think that when you decide that certain viewpoints or groups are just not allowable at all, all you do is marginalize those groups and push them even further to the extreme. I think you could make a case that Fox News et al would possibly be less extreme if the progressive movement wasn't so vocal about eradicating all potential opposition.

Just my two cents. I'd be really interested to hear other's thoughts on this subject, because I think that bigotry is tied to a whole bunch of other related problems that need solving.

rtpg• 12 years ago

Do you think this will push the envelope toward greater acceptance of homosexuality?

Well at the very least it will make life harder for bigots.

Seriously, this isn't about the fact that Eich donated to Prop 8 5 years ago, it's that he seems to still hold this position. He has had ample time to offer an apology( in a sort of "facts change" manner) and the fact that he hasn't makes the case that he still believes in oppressing homosexuals pretty strong.

Free speech is not consequence-free speech, and he's still able to say what he wants. But expecting people to ignore who he is when he's representing one of the most symbolic companies in the open source communities is unrealistic.

Why would any of us want someone with those social views representing the tech community at large (especially at a time where so many -ism's have shown themselves to be prevalent). If he just wanted to do tech, maybe he should have stayed CTO.

hexis2• 12 years ago

That was a well stated defense of intolerance.

natural2194• 12 years ago

I completely agree with you. I think after that interview, this was the correct path. Still, I think we should give people a chance, upon taking a new position, to hold to at least a somewhat clean public record. He made that donation in five years ago. He probably had no idea at the time he would be seeking such a public position. Unlike Dan Cathy, there's no indication he would have brought up his views on his own (he would have likely to consider it a bad idea). Once enough hate had been generated, the interview was inevitable. And once it's out in the open, I mean, I agree, he should have backed down. I'm somewhat proud of him and I respect him more, but if you're a board of directors, you have responsibilities.

Overall, I think society benefits from the flexibility of forgiveness. Branden is a prodigal and historic figure -- we should at least give him the chance to continue changing the world.

hugi• 12 years ago

Someone whose ideology involves actively fighting against other people's personal freedom should not control Mozilla.

I'm a little confused by how people fail to see this. Mozilla represents freedom while Brendan represents oppression.

His technical abilities have nothing to do with this and he's probably a fine CTO. That's where he should have stayed.

williamcotton• 12 years ago

This sort of muckraking has gone on for a very long time. It is basically an institution at this point. It has the function of keeping the powerful from attempting to speak down upon the week.

It should be a lesson for anyone who speaks out against minorities, the poor, and any other disadvantaged peoples.

The published disdain for authority is one of the cornerstones of American democracy.

There are public and social responsibilities that come with the type of money, power and prestige that success in business and industry offers.

Those who don't agree will soon feel the might of the pen and the full implications of the freedoms that allow us to openly communicate and conduct business.

While I respect Mr. Eich and his right to his own personal opinions, he can't expect to attain such publicly visible positions of authority without having his underwear hung out to dry.

Our industry could also learn a thing or two about populism. It should learn to embrace it. Young, hot-shots should learn a modicum of decency. Those with their eyes set on great accomplishments should learn the value of respecting those that don't value the same things.

In addition, savvy entrepreneurs can use populism to their advantage with great success. It doesn't have to be a hinderance. We're a social creature. It makes complete sense that figureheads have the ability to help or hurt the perceptions of potential customers.

Venture capitalism, as expressed in Silicon Valley, has been rather short-sighted and irresponsible as of late. It is not only condoning but also promoting an attitude of arrogance. I blame any member of an older generation that lacks the leadership and guidance that should be an integral part of the types of social change that come about when many millions of dollars are in play. There is a lot of visible excess in our industry right now. I sure as hell can't put too much blame on a bunch of kids who just left the nest.

Unfortunately for Mr. Eich his reputation is of further interest to journalists who have been successfully crafting the narrative of a dark side to an entire industry.

If our industry doesn't like the unfair side effects of having a disreputable image it should work to change the narrative instead of demonizing and adding fuel the flames of popular discontent.

Right now the story is about private shuttle busses, evictions, sexism, ageism, and yes, homophobic CEOs, along with a slew of other forms of imbalances in perceived difference.

What are we going to do about it?

pvnick• 12 years ago

This is so upsetting, it's infuriating. Here we had a wonderful chance for someone brilliant like Eich to lead one of the most important organizations in defending us against looming omnipresent state surveillance, and a bunch of social justice warriors went and ruined it. Pat yourselves on the back guys, you won!

visualR22• 12 years ago

Send him to the concentration camp of tolerance!

thenmar2• 12 years ago

If you don't tolerate my bigotry, you're intolerant!

untog2• 12 years ago

Would you support a company whose CEO was a dazzling, intelligent, brilliant racist? Or anti-semite?

I don't understand how being brilliant means that everyone should ignore that you're also a bigot. Presumably if he had no talent then he'd be fair game?

visualR22• 12 years ago

Is he a bigot? "A bigot is someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust or hatred." I don't think he does that. He just wrongly thinks the state shouldnt recognize same sex marriage.

chillingeffect• 12 years ago

It looks like he apparently also invented Javascript!?

If this is true, how many people are going to boycott Javascript now?!

Are you going to stop going to websites that use Javascript?

How can you ignore the fact that the inventor of that language is a bigot?

No matter how brilliant the language is.

rinon4• 12 years ago

This is very sad and unfortunate. Brendan was basically forced out of his own job because of a political view he supported. No matter whether you agree or disagree with someone's views, a discussion should be reasonable and fair, not a lynching in the court of popular opinion. We should respect others views, and their freedom to support any political position, if we wish those same freedoms for ourselves.

thenmar2• 12 years ago

What if he were a black woman and the political group she donated to was one that sought to prevent white men from becoming engineers? They can still do engineering, of course, but they can't have the state title and benefits that go along with it. Would you feel the same way?

rhizome3• 12 years ago

Consider what would happen to a CEO who held the political view that profits should be minimized.

throwaway812• 12 years ago

Tarsnap?

rinon4• 12 years ago

Does this view conflict with the job description? If this is so, then this makes the person ill-suited for the job, just like innumerable other workers who don't have the best qualifications for their jobs. Does this mean the view is wrong? Not necessarily, but that is an entirely different question. Does this mean that we should publicly deride this person for their view and boycott the company who hired them? No. This is the job of the board of directors, who answer to the shareholders of the company, and their responsibility. Certainly anyone outside can offer advice, but only as an outsider, who has no right or reason to blackmail and threaten the company.

sdoowpilihp• 12 years ago

That is not a political view. That is acting directly in opposition to a CEO's fiduciary duty.

firstOrder• 12 years ago

Exactly. I read the book "Nickled and Dimed" when it came out. In the book, she describes a job application test which asks if employers and employees interests are aligned. She noted to herself this seemed a pretty political question.

I applied for a job at a retail store and was asked the same question prior to getting the job. I thought of the first words of the constitution of that American union which was founded in 1905, the IWW - "The working class and the employing class have nothing in common".

So nowadays, not only managers, but employees who think workers are entitled to keep the wealth they create, are verboten. Of course thinking profits can get kicked up to the lazy idle class loafer heirs as dividend checks is all well enough.

Some anti-homosexual screwball is finally pushed out, and finally everyone gets up in arms about how unfair it is that people are pushed out of their jobs. What a laugh.

Whatever God Eich worships who tells him to scorn men who love men, the idle class heir VC limited partner is the God of HN. Doing anything (traction!) to gain his favor and a piece of his surplus value stolen capital is HN's religion.

mbrubeck2• 12 years ago

I've seen people in this thread using words like "lynching" and "concentration camp" to describe what happened to Brendan. I understand people are angry about events, but please try to remember that for people in minorities, these words have meanings that are not at all similar to "don't get to be CEO of a software company."

Lynching: http://www.americanlynching.com/images/28482.jpg

Concentration camp: http://www.history.com/images/media/slideshow/holocaust-conc...

(Probably-unnecessary warning: these are graphic images of violence by humans against humans.)

magicalist• 12 years ago

The concentration camp stuff is just stupidly reductionist South Park references. It would be great if the comments would just be downloaded into oblivion, but apparently we're not rising to the occasion.

rinon4• 12 years ago

I was using a broader definition of lynching to mean any punishment meted out by popular opinion rather than proper processes. I certainly was not using the term literally, and I am fully aware of the horrible historical background of lynching. I certainly did not mean to trivialize this history.

adwf2• 12 years ago

I think you're confusing the respect we should have for a persons right to a view, with respect for the actual view itself. The former I have, the latter I do not.

squidsoup• 12 years ago

The right to marriage is far more than a political issue, it's a fundamental human rights issue.

visualR22• 12 years ago

It was a political issue in 2008, it was a ballot initiative. You grandiose view of the issue doesn't change the fact that he is being punished for his political expression.

wonderzombie7• 12 years ago

Good grief. You do far more harm to your position by invoking a practice part of a century-long campaign of terror against a racial minority.

Free speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism. It means the opposite, actually. And we as a society have decided some views are socially unacceptable. Anti-homosexual bigotry has been added to the list, along with pro-slavery or violence against women. Those are topics which are really just not up for debate anymore— we are in theory an egalitarian society, where plurality takes precedence over someone's right to (e.g.) express negative views, esp about minorities.

pbateman• 12 years ago

Well, it's not going to be a popular opinion but I think it's a shame he's been forced out. Simply having the wrong views shouldn't make him ineligible for a job.

rhizome3• 12 years ago

Why? Doesn't it happen all the time? I'm not just talking about "culture fit," either.

benched• 12 years ago

It has proven to be a much more popular opinion, at least on Hacker News, than I ever would have thought possible in 2014.

influx2• 12 years ago

There may be those who disagree who are now afraid to speak, considering their jobs may be at risk if they express the "wrong" opinion.

pbreit2• 12 years ago

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at it. He had a chance to resolve the matter differently and wasn't able to. It's possible/probable that he is not CEO material (for this company at this time).

zem2• 12 years ago

depends on the job. being cto is one thing; being the ceo is a far more people-oriented role with a far more significant impact on how people who work for mozilla are potentially treated.

and this is not about his views; he actually donated money to help ensure that people would not get equal rights; even though those rights did not affect him in any way.

PedroBatista3• 12 years ago

So today I learned the CEO is much more people-oriented role because everybody knows "technical" people aren't really people.

He voted for prop 8 which means he doesn't want people to have the same rights (which before that everybody had (of course!!!)), so it goes like this: Heaven on Earth --> prop 8 --> gay holocaust --> Brendan must go.

It makes perfect sense sir.

devindotcom12• 12 years ago

Really, there are no views you can think of that would qualify someone as being ineligible for a job? What if someone refused to acknowledge women as people? What if someone refused to work with black people? What if someone viewed the holocaust as never having happened?

KwanEsq• 12 years ago

It's sad that Mozilla is losing someone of Eich's technical ability, but having him as CEO simply wasn't tenable.

His appointment was a misjudgement.

mauricioc• 12 years ago

I think he just deleted/deactivated his Twitter account, @BrendanEich.

agumonkey• 12 years ago

I hope it's his decision and not some misguided hack. Probably too many angry comments to be useful anymore anyway.

bp123• 12 years ago

It's a shame he couldn't reconsider his oppressive stance on gay rights, which would have allowed him to accomplish the goals with Mozilla. Oh well.

jhonovich• 12 years ago

Is there any record or incidences in his 15 years working at Mozilla of him discriminating or maltreating anyone?

I ask this because, in the Recode article, Mozilla's executive chairwomen, says "That [the contribution] was shocking to me, because I never saw any kind of behavior or attitude from him that was not in line with Mozilla’s values of inclusiveness"

Unless there is some evidence, 15 years track record in a company should seemingly count for more than a single political contribution. Yes/no?

Zelphyr• 12 years ago

I think this helps clarify the distinction between him being CEO and a blatant racist being CEO (a comparison that seems to be common in this thread).

Should a person be allowed in a position of power if they are able to separate their personal beliefs and lead the organization properly, without improper bias against anyone? I suspect this has happened many times before.

I don't see how the LGBT community has benefited much from this. It seems to me that giving him credit for clearly not letting his personal beliefs affect his work relationships and taking a wait-and-see stance would've resulted in a more productive outcome. Would this not have been an opportunity to educate someone who is otherwise seemingly capable of reasoned and rational thought?

evertonfuller2• 12 years ago

Keyboard social justice warriors won then. Sad day. Best of luck to Mozilla. And to America.

evertonfuller2• 12 years ago

Loving all the downvotes.

ChuckMcM• 12 years ago

I don't suppose anyone knows if he has a severance package? Doesn't seem like he is being forced out for 'cause' and the celebrity of his departure at Mozilla could easily damage his ability to be employed as a CEO elsewhere.

pbreit2• 12 years ago

Would any of the admins (or anyone) care to elaborate on why all the Eich-related posts are being deleted?

yaur2• 12 years ago

Most likely because they are not remaining civil very long. Time for pending comments?

adwf2• 12 years ago

I've posted this elsewhere, but in one of the many dupes that got buried, so I'll repost it here:

I really think it was inevitable once people started complaining about his political background. The whole appointment had become about the gay rights issue rather than about where he would lead Mozilla in the future.

No one really thought he was suddenly going to turn Mozilla into an anti-gay rights organisation, but standing down is still the decent thing to do. It lets Mozilla focus back on their mission and carry on without controversy.

In a way it's a little sad though. I was kinda hoping that he'd say he'd had a change of heart since prop8 and renounce his views. Maybe that's just the optimist in me though...

ndarilek• 12 years ago

Another perspective that I'm surprised hasn't been voiced:

Brendan had the privilege to climb to the rank of CEO, if only for a few days. But it is because of views like his that many don't get a chance at all to climb to anywhere near those heights. I know many qualified, talented, awesome people who, if they were straight and able to marry the loves of their lives, could become American citizens and pursue meaningful opportunities here (arguments about whether moving here is such a good idea these days not withstanding.) And marriage is just one of many ways in which we as a society diminish, limit or actively dehumanize those not a member of the majority.

I tolerate your views right up to the point where they make someone's dying moments hell because their husband or wife can't visit, or bar someone from working for someone else because of their gender or skin color. At that point, yeah, I'll gladly be a biggot against biggots.

Perhaps the reason we don't see more minorities in positions of power is that so many of us exercise our influence, be it via rhetoric or $1000 donations, to keep them out of those positions. I can't bring myself to feel bad when someone who does that is brought down.

yaur2• 12 years ago

I have misgivings here mainly because I have previously given enough to political campaigns that any prospective employer that cares can find out what my politics are. The idea that my personal political opinions are fair game in a hiring decision is scary.

Granted, its a little different when we are talking about the CEO of a foundation with a specific ideology, but if this becomes wide spread the chilling effects are something to be concerned about.

dragonwriter• 12 years ago

Granted, its a little different when we are talking about the CEO of a foundation with a specific ideology

Eich was CEO of Mozilla Corporation, not the Mozilla Foundation.

jim1313• 12 years ago

He was on the side of the majority of California, this wasn't a vote in Texas or India. Even the mainstream Democrats were against Gay marriage a couple years earlier.

Many anti-abortion proponents consider abortion a form of murder, which is a more serious issue. But I don't see campaigns against CEOs who support abortion.

Comparing his view with racism is ridiculous. He's not for discriminating against homosexuals, just for keeping marriage as it's been. Can the growing polygamist movement immediately discredit everyone opposed to them as bigots also?

devindotcom12• 12 years ago

As others have pointed out - if he was against interracial marriage, would you consider that as constituting racism?

bashinator• 12 years ago

If we were trying to keep marriage "as it's been", then I would have gotten a dowry, had a couple concubines on the side, and my wives would have been considered my personal property.

wonderzombie7• 12 years ago

"Keeping marriage as it's been" is a post-hoc rationalization, to attempt to disconnect the anti-gay-marriage crowd from a religious argument. Go read the Bible that's used to justify this crap and write up a compare/contrast.

Futurebot• 12 years ago

People who think this is unjust, think about this. If Eich had instead donated to a Neo-Nazi party, a group that supports re-legalizing slavery, or an organization taking away women's right to vote, would your opinion be any different? For those who say 'no, my opinion would be the same. Free speech is free speech and political affiliation is political affiliation' would you be comfortable working at Mozilla? I think this is the much more important practical concern. Eich's ability to continue as CEO was _compromised_ - could he hire and retain talent? Would Mozilla have seen a mass quit? Could they continue to get volunteers to work on the code?

The social justice warrior lynch mob can be an ugly, fickle beast, and its actions can be a double-edged sword, there's no question about it. In this case, they may have saved Mozilla (and Eich) from themselves.

edit: being the public face of a company is different in kind than being another kind of worker. Its "distance" from CTO may not be large, but the "king is the king" as it were.

edit 2: a couple of bigger questions here that will/should be asked. Should CEOs remain apolitical, or at least take great pains to hide their affiliations - particularly in industries with many much more liberal-minded workers? Will they after this?

Interesting stat: latest Pew has 61% of Republicans under 30 supporting gay marriage. Take that as you may, but I'd go with 'excellent bellwether for society at large'.

pastProlog• 12 years ago

I'm not that surprised that the mind warped enough to create something like Javascript is also warped enough to have some weird backwoods Christian fundamentalist fear of homosexuals.

Good riddance.

vectorpush3• 12 years ago

Eich had the freedom to donate his hard earned money to an anti-gay cause. LGBT supporters had the freedom to make blog posts and tweets about their opinions on the matter. Eich had the freedom to stand by his position. Mozilla had the freedom to designate its CEO.

Why the outrage? The system worked. The only group that had it's freedom threatened was the group of individuals targeted by the prop 8 law. Denizens of the internet could have spared Eich their ire if they were so inclined. Eich could have apologized if he were so inclined. Mozilla could have stuck by Eich if they were so inclined. Everybody acted in their own interest and Eich's resignation is a consequence of that fact.

myers• 12 years ago

Here's my question: What was the board thinking to put him in place? It's not as if Eich won a contest just by inventing one of the most widely distributed programming languages, there were folks who decided he was the best to lead Mozilla forward. How did they go so wrong?

The Next Mission

Related Stories