Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inclusiveness at Mozilla

brendaneich.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 196 posts

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#131

Post by gcp »

sroerick wrote: post #45
[deleted] wrote: post #26

[deleted]

I was in SF last week and visited the Mozilla office to see what it looked like. It looked like a locked door with a surveillance camera outside. I understand the need for security and privacy, but it was a little jarring to see it from Mozilla. I'm sure if I can contacted someone for a tour I'd have gotten a better response, but my perception of the organization has changed a little bit.

In some (most?) cases that's unfortunately required by the owners of the building. I know it's the case for London, and the old MV office.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#132

Post by macu »

GuiA wrote: post #87
macu wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of question, in fact the entire uproar, presumes that Brendan Eich is a hateful bigoted person with an agenda, or at least that he has some kind of dangerous impulse we should worry about. Do you think his stomach turns when he's around gay people? I don't believe it for a moment. If anything he probably just feels afraid that someone's going to attack him and accuse him of bigotry. Homophobia and oppositio…

See my other comment in this thread that touches on this point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7476046 I don't think that Brendan's stomach turns when he's around gay people or anything like that. However, I do believe that as the CEO of an entity (especially Mozilla), his beliefs will necessarily influence his actions; and that the particular beliefs highlighted by this action are at odds with Mozilla, thus ma…

I agree in general. So long as humans partake in decision-making, decisions will be made according to the minds involved.

I would worry about the possible impact of Brendan's personal beliefs if I thought that he truly has a heartfelt disdain for whole classes of people, but as far as I can tell, he doesn't.

The question of whether to support gay marriage doesn't always reduce to bigotry and homophobia. In Brendan's case, although no one seems to know, I think it comes down to a simple and specific commitment to a traditional idea of marriage, and it probably doesn't have the far-reaching implications that people assume.

Of course, his donation could have been motivated by complex ideologies. In that case, if we're going to hold people to such a high standard on the moral checklist, then I would worry more about the things that we don't know than the little glimpses we have into the inner lives of our leaders.

It's interesting to see where all this public discussion is going.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#133

Post by tommorris »

coldtea wrote: post #98
brown9-2 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Mozilla employees, contributors, and users have the same exact right as a private citizen to be upset about Eich's personal beliefs on the matter. The "right to have your own opinion" extends to everyone involved - pulling this card out to defend his beliefs doesn't end any debate.

> And Mozilla employees, contributors, and users have the same exact right as a private citizen to be upset about Eich's personal beliefs on the matter. They should have the exact same right in the exaxt same way: as "private citizens". That is, not as Mozilla employees trying to oppose a CEO placement. That they don't like his personal beliefs should in no way get in the way of working with him -- unless he brings t…

Pretty much all the Mozilla employees I've seen on social media have been quiet as lambs or supportive of Eich.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#135

Post by macu »

belovedeagle wrote: post #129
danudey wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brendan went out of his way to donate a thousand dollars to prevent a group of people from sharing the same right as everyone else. Allowing it would have harmed no one. Not him, not them, not anyone. There are no negative downsides, other than a subset of religious individuals who wish to impose their strictures onto all of society feeling less in control of their lives. I have a hard time accepting, as a leader, so…

And so the correct response is for [a segment of] society to impose its views on him? I don't see the logic here; I suspect there really isn't any. You say that "Allowing it would have harmed no one." Tell me, who is it harming for Brendan to be CEO of Mozilla? The answer is not "LGBT people", because he's already stated that his personal views won't change policy; and it's just not plausible that Mozilla will sudden…

Yes, completely agreed. People have the right to try to change others' views, but not to impose their views when trying fails.

Perhaps donating to Prop 8 was "trying to impose" but the backlash is of the same ilk.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#136

Post by jkelsey »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #35
jedanbik wrote: post #20

I'm happy he said something. He didn't have to.

Unfortunately, he did have to. Eich holds an opinion that, while apparently shared with the majority of Californian voters (as per Prop 8 results), is deeply unpopular with segments of the technical population. These are some of the folks who will help promote and test Mozilla's future releases. They are part of Mozilla's customer base. He had to apologize, because these days holding a politically incorrect opinion i…

It wasn't even a apology. He's just highlighted Mozilla's stance on diversity and inclusion, which is good and deserves some credit. However, the facts about this situation remain the same: 1. He donated a large amount of money to a effort to remove a civil right from a certain subset of Californians based on nothing more than their sexual preference. 2. He has not signaled any regret for doing that. That is reprehensible.

Mozilla is a wonderful organization, and I'll continue to use Firefox. I don't know if I'll be so willing to donate to the foundation as much anymore. The actions of one person shouldn't ruin all that Mozilla stands for. Regardless, Brendan Eich has tarnished his otherwise amazing reputation with donation to Prop 8 and his unwillingness to admit any wrongdoing. Mozilla's has also done the same to their own reputation by making him CEO.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#137

Post by lern_too_spel »

coldtea wrote: post #46
hapless wrote: post #11

He just wanted to take an opportunity to "express [..] sorrow at having caused pain." Eich does not regret his actions, he's just sorry that you felt pain because of the things he did. Classic business-ese non-apology.

Why should he regret his actions? It's his personal opinion and he backed it with his own money, and at his own leisure time. He has a right to believer whatever he likes in his personal life, and push politically for whetever outcome he prefers -- as long as he is not abusing the law. Apologising for how you vote, or what you believe, or what policies you root for is not democracy. And, yes, in a democracy you can a…

Democracy has nothing to do with this. Democracy is a system of government.

This is about decency. What kind of person goes out of his way to oppress other people? Is that the kind of person I want heading an organization I'm affiliated with? No. Will it affect the Mozilla organization because others feel the way I do? It appears so. Given that, is Eich a good choice for CEO? Probably not.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#138

Post by cturner »

danudey wrote: post #96
pavpanchekha wrote: post #59

Wait, wait, hold on. Folks, this man isn't a politician, he isn't a social crusader, he isn't using his position as a platform. At worst, he's rich. He hasn't taken the throne, or even government office; he's the CEO of a private corporation that makes web browsers of all things. Now, sure, he might be against gay marriage. And you might disagree, and have a variety of principles to back your position. But why do we…

Brendan went out of his way to donate a thousand dollars to prevent a group of people from sharing the same right as everyone else. Allowing it would have harmed no one. Not him, not them, not anyone. There are no negative downsides, other than a subset of religious individuals who wish to impose their strictures onto all of society feeling less in control of their lives. I have a hard time accepting, as a leader, so…

   > Brendan went out of his way to donate a thousand dollars
   > to prevent a group of people from sharing the same right
   > as everyone else.
Right? The right to have a piece of paper from a government department endorsing the validity of your relationship with someone else? That's petty.

If you're in an alternative relationship and want to have a permanent union with someone else, or with several other people, you can go and draw up a contract and then get on with your lives. It could take as little as ten minutes. Contract law is fantastic like this.

Everything substantial is already available through contract law.

   > it's that he's trying to impose them on all of society.
Hypocrisy. Religious types who want to mandate how other people can live are off-key. But people who get carried away by the cause of gay marriage are equally ridiculous. You're playing the same game as the religious types. The missing piece of that expression of your political power enshrined in law - a political endorsement of certain relationships.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#139

Post by ebiester »

DanielStraight wrote: post #72

Brendan Eich has now publicly committed to... 1. Include LGBT individuals in making decisions regarding discrimination and inclusivity. 2. Continue health benefits for same-sex partners. 3. Uphold anti-discrimination policies. 4. Create new initiatives to reach out to those who feel marginalized. 5. Support an initialize for bringing under-represented people (including LGBT individuals) into tech. And apparently he i…

It's not logical -- and none of it pretend it is.

All I can say is that when one grows up having been physically, emotionally, verbally, and spiritually harassed for a greater part of one's life, these little things end up bringing up the whole ball of shit.

It short circuits logic, but it's a common human trait. Some Jewish people still won't buy Volkswagon cars, for example, and I remember hearing WWII Veterans who wouldn't buy anything from Japan.

Pain has a long, long memory.

Re: Inclusiveness at Mozilla

#140

Post by rogerbinns »

cturner wrote: post #138
danudey wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brendan went out of his way to donate a thousand dollars to prevent a group of people from sharing the same right as everyone else. Allowing it would have harmed no one. Not him, not them, not anyone. There are no negative downsides, other than a subset of religious individuals who wish to impose their strictures onto all of society feeling less in control of their lives. I have a hard time accepting, as a leader, so…

> Brendan went out of his way to donate a thousand dollars > to prevent a group of people from sharing the same right > as everyone else. Right? The right to have a piece of paper from a government department endorsing the validity of your relationship with someone else? That's petty. If you're in an alternative relationship and want to have a permanent union with someone else, or with several other people, you can g…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of...

> According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are 1,138 statutory provisions[1] in which marital status is a factor in determining benefits, rights, and privileges. These rights were a key issue in the debate over federal recognition of same-sex marriage.

Post reply on HN