I'm not going to comment on Brendan Eich or the mob. I want to comment about friendship. Marc Andreesen could have done the politically correct thing and thrown Eich under the bus. He didn't.
Whatever Eich is, whatever happens with Eich, whatever the mob is, the thing I get out of this whole thing is that Andreesen is a classy guy. Don't know if that's the biggest lesson I'm supposed to be getting out of this whole situation, but it is what it is.
Much respect to Andreesen for being willing to stick his head out in a cool and calm manner. No stoking the fire. No running away from the drama. Just a clear statement that he is able to care about his friends.
i've stood my ground for my beliefs when people were ridiculing me for doing so. it's a lonely position to be in. i didn't share eich's views here, but he's free to have them, and the reason for the problem is, ironically, the intolerance of other people (people forcing their "tolerance" down his throat). he has my respect. not for his view on gays. but for staying true to what he did. i think this is a shame.
Except he didn't stand his ground at all. He never once explained his beliefs. If he had done that I think people would've been a lot more tolerant of him. I don't think it had to end this way.
Assuming people can logically explain why they're LGBTQ. Most of the time personal beliefs are irrational.
I think this showed Eich is insufficiently dedicated to Mozilla's mission. If Eich believed he can help Mozilla's mission by being a CEO (otherwise, why bother?), is lying about an issue more important than how much you could help Mozilla's mission? Utilitarian 101. On the other hand, Eich probably didn't make such utilitarian calculation, and followed "do not lie" deontology instead. Pity.
It's very hard to lead when you always say what's convenient rather than what you actually believe. I know executives like that - every word out of their mouth is a sales pitch - and their people don't trust them, the rest of the company doesn't trust them, and the public at large doesn't trust them.
It's certainly always possible to change what you believe, and that's a lot more ethical than lying about what you believe. Of course, Brendan is a failure as a CEO and a decent human being because he REFUSED to change what he believed.
It's ironic that bigots of Brendan's ilk strongly believe that it's possible for gays to change their sexual preference, while they continue to cling to what they believe in the face of all the facts that prove them wrong.
I am a strong supporter of gay marriage, but I have to say that I find this very unfortunate and worrying. Apparently many Mozilla supporters seem to think it is okay to bully a qualified person out of his job only for his political views, even if they had absolutely no effect on his qualification or his actions on the job. I can't help but feel like this campaign has done a lot more harm to him than his $1000 donati…
Is his political views are contrary to some of the organization's core values (such as diversity and inclusiveness), then he should have refused the job. To be fair, I don't think anyone saw this as an issue at that point. Everyone has blind spots.
Eich didn't make that donation yesterday, you know. But I agree. He made a small donation to a political cause. Are we going to start ritually sacrificing people who don't line up with our personal causes and opinions? I think this sets a draconian precedent. If this is where the culture in the Valley is headed, I'm incredibly glad I'm not a part of it.
Are we going to start ritually sacrificing people who don't line up with our personal causes and opinions? No - we are hopefully going to continue objecting to the appointment of people whose personal views are incompatible with the values of the organisation they are supposed to represent. That's totally legitimate, and I absolutely fail to see what is wrong with doing so.
I guess a personal donation, to me, of a material-but-not-enormous amount, toes the line between "personal views" being thrown out there in the public, and things that are pretty much ones own business. I have no problem with an organization saying "we don't like Mr. Eich's frequent outspoken rants against homosexuals" (if there were any), but the fact that the guy wrote a $1,000 check one time? Eh... to me this approaches the territory of getting mad at someone for laughing at a homosexual joke. Poor taste, I don't agree with it, but I don't necessarily think it ought to be treated as a public representation of ones personal views.
on the other hand we just showed that when a mob on the Internet wants something - they get it. I don't think that this follows. In this particular case, someone was promoted to a role which many felt was incompatible with his personal views; they made that known, and the person in question stepped down. That's kind of how things should work in a community enterprise. That said, I understand he's received wildly disp…
Not to minimize the issue, but receiving death threats is rapidly becoming part of being a public figure on the Internet. Columnists, reporters, celebrities, and many others receive them all the time. It's definitely unacceptable, but it's not like we have shown an ability to control it, and I can't think of any assassinations of high-profile Internet figures. I'm surprised you're surprised at people, though! Death t…
I really wish when people talked about "death threats", there was some clarification on what that actually means.
Is it a detailed email summarized as "I know where you live, you better watch your step, because I'm going to kill you"?
For example, if the mob tomorrow decides that it's OK to give up privacy for "security", mozilla will happily have to oblige to become a state security tool. That's why strong leadership with values is needed.
I don't think 'standing in the way of equality' is really the kind of values that Mozilla needs.
Apparently "tolerant to opposing political opinions" is not such a value either.
I presume most Mozilla users, myself included, are in favor of gay marriage, yet there is no clause that you "have to support gay marriage" to use Mozilla software. It's also obvious that if Eich ever let his political beliefs affect his decisions on software he would be fired immediately.
I generally agree with you but I think the problem here is that being against gay marriage is more than just a "political view." Being for low taxes is a political view. Being for smaller government is a political view. Believing a certain group of people don't deserve to live their lives like other simply because of who they love is not a political view. It reads as extremely hateful and that makes people uncomforta…
So Barack Obama, the President of the US, was against gay marriage in 2008; I'm confused as to why he gets a pass here, but the head of Mozilla doesn't?
He didn't get a pass. A lot of people made a huge issue out of it from the day he announced to the day he changed his views. He also didn't stand in the way of the advancing equality movement while he mulled it over. Brendan Eich did, to the tune of $1000.
I generally agree with you but I think the problem here is that being against gay marriage is more than just a "political view." Being for low taxes is a political view. Being for smaller government is a political view. Believing a certain group of people don't deserve to live their lives like other simply because of who they love is not a political view. It reads as extremely hateful and that makes people uncomforta…
So Barack Obama, the President of the US, was against gay marriage in 2008; I'm confused as to why he gets a pass here, but the head of Mozilla doesn't?
Because he's recanted, and is too powerful to assail anyway. 'Who, Whom?'