Live data from Hacker News

Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

blog.mozilla.org

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It speaks a lot to his integrity that he didn't. Would you rather have a CEO who says one thing in public and then goes and does another thing surreptitiously, or one who stands up for his beliefs even when they're unpopular?

I don't think 'integrity' in the face of an opinion that is becoming more and more unacceptable to hold in our culture is a good thing. Changing your views, and admitting you were wrong is the best thing you can do.

I don't think 'integrity' in the face of an opinion that is becoming more and more unacceptable to hold in our culture is a good thing.

"Unacceptable"? Really? I don't get this mindset. The core premise of a free and open society is that you can hold any opinion you want, no matter how unpopular or "unacceptable".

Personally, I absolutely value this kind of integrity. An individual should stand firm to their principles and stand by them, regardless of what "society" or "out culture" think.

Of course, there may be consequences (economic, or whatever) as a result of having that opinion, at least if you're vocal about it. But to suggest that one should change one's views to simply fit the majority, is one of the most disturbing things I could imagine.

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#314
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have considered him a worse person if he'd done that. I disagree with his opinions on marriage, but he has the right to have those opinions, and to provide support for causes he believes in. I'm not shocked the he is stepping down, or that others in the organization appear to have applied substantial pressure on him to do so, but it makes me sad. Their statements about supporting freedom of speech are hollow:…

Ironically, though, his opinion was supported by the majority in that California election: 7 million to 6.4 million in favor of Prop 8. I guess if they consider any other candidates for CEO from California, they'll have to ask them how they voted.

So you're saying it was wrong for the Supreme Court to strike down bans on mixed race marriages because at the time an overwhelming majority of Americans were against it?

Why do you think human rights should be put up for a vote? Are you against mixed race marriage because it was so unpopular at the time the "activist court" struck it down?

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#315
post #14

From the recode recap - http://recode.net/2014/04/03/mozilla-co-founder-brendan-eich... >“It’s clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting,” said Baker, who added that she would not and could not speak for Eich. “The ability to lead — particularly for the CEO — is fundamental to the role and that is not possible here.” The most damning aspect of this was their a) inability to predict this would be an issue…

[deleted]

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#316
post #169
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have considered him a worse person if he'd done that. I disagree with his opinions on marriage, but he has the right to have those opinions, and to provide support for causes he believes in. I'm not shocked the he is stepping down, or that others in the organization appear to have applied substantial pressure on him to do so, but it makes me sad. Their statements about supporting freedom of speech are hollow:…

Freedom of speech is to be exercised only for populist opinions. If we continue to travel down this path, we'd all have the same opinions, as anyone who dares to hold an different opinion than the majority would be ostracized from the society.

Ironically, what you're saying is that the right to free speech for the people who dissented shouldn't be respected.

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#317
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, though, his opinion was supported by the majority in that California election: 7 million to 6.4 million in favor of Prop 8. I guess if they consider any other candidates for CEO from California, they'll have to ask them how they voted.

How can it be a right if it's subject to a majority vote?

What's the other option? One person, or a small elite group, deciding the list of "rights"?

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think 'integrity' in the face of an opinion that is becoming more and more unacceptable to hold in our culture is a good thing. Changing your views, and admitting you were wrong is the best thing you can do.

This line of reasoning is very troubling to me, because 20 years ago it was pretty much unacceptable in the U.S. to hold the opinion that gays were entitled to full legal rights, let alone the ability to marry. That changed only because some very courageous people stuck their neck out, weathered all the flack and negative personal repercussions towards themselves, and gradually made the point of "Why not?" I fully su…

There's two sides to that -- the first is that, yes, he absolutely has the right to hold any opinion he wants to, no matter how noxious I or others may find them. To paraphrase Hall on Voltaire, I'll defend to the death their right to be assholes. (Full disclosure: pro- gay marriage, anti-Prop 8, not a CA resident, so doesn't really affect me.)

On the other hand, there's no absolute right to be a public-facing CEO, and it's not unreasonable for the public to name-and-shame companies for their stances on public issues and the people they choose as corporate leaders.

In some cases, this means right-wing activists boycotting and gay-marriage advocates praising Target for same-sex wedding registry ads; in others, it's blue-staters deciding not to eat at Chik-Fil-A for its right-wing political donations, and red-staters buying that 24-piece combo for the exact same reason. Personally, I do think that Eich did all the right things as far as policy and PR goes, and I'm actually a bit sorry that he's stepping down.

I think that the real sin here was not his political donations, it was the fact that he and MoCo didn't make at least cursory efforts to wargame out the possible PR issues that they ran into, which meant they were unprepared to deal with the firestorms.

It's obvious that a significant number of board members weren't happy with Eich's promotion on strategic grounds, and the Prop 8 issue was just the icing on the big poisonous cake of bad publicity. Generally speaking, if you're the CEO, the company should be in the news, not you, and Eich was getting hammered left and right.

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It speaks a lot to his integrity that he didn't. Would you rather have a CEO who says one thing in public and then goes and does another thing surreptitiously, or one who stands up for his beliefs even when they're unpopular?

I don't think 'integrity' in the face of an opinion that is becoming more and more unacceptable to hold in our culture is a good thing. Changing your views, and admitting you were wrong is the best thing you can do.

"Changing your views" isn't what was suggested.

Re: Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

#320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>even if they had absolutely no effect on his qualification or his actions on the job. There's no evidence of this either way, and the qualifications for being a CEO are nearly orthogonal to the qualifications for being a developer. He's clearly an outstanding developer; though javascript seems the product of a damaged mind, it's the water we all swim in. As a CEO, he chooses the direction of the company and manages…

What evidence is there that he's a "homophobe"? 7 million other Californians also voted for Prop 8. Does that make them all homophobes?

Either homophobes, or very misguided. All the evidence points towards Eich falling in the former camp, unfortunately. To recap:

"Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs."

It's pretty clear to me that campaigning to prevent homosexuals from enjoying the same rights as heterosexuals falls under this definition.

Post reply on HN