Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week • Hacker News Board

Re: Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week

#51

Post by cgh » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 11:37 PM UTC

wheaties wrote: post #5

avmich wrote: post #2

Gay marriage opinion is the grounds for changing CEO. How about immigration opinion? Animal rights opinion? Climate change opinion? Political views?

Sorry but I have to agree with this. If the purpose of the role is to be the CEO of a company dedicated to open source software then his religion, personal beliefs, and his lifestyle choices should have no bearing on being a CEO. That includes both people who are for AND against gay marriage. We aren't supposed to discriminate on any front when hiring someone so what makes this different?

It's not hard to understand: replace the word "gay" with "black". Now do you see the problem?

Aside from that, much of the job of being a C-level executive is about perception and trust. People need to see you're a "good person" who is frictionlessly aligned with the company's public profile. Weird outliers, like denying gay people the right to get married, cause friction.

Re: Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week

#52

Post by moskie » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 11:46 PM UTC

This is a good thing. And I strongly disagree with the idea that none of his political beliefs should be taken into account when determining whether he should be the CEO of Mozilla.

When it comes to personal/political beliefs, there is a line. Having beliefs that go beyond that line means it will (should) affect your professional life. But people draw that line at different places, meaning that, in aggregate, you don't know where the chips will fall in situations like Eich being the CEO of Mozilla. Some people draw the line in a place, such that supporting anti-gay marriage legislation is acceptable, others do not.

I think few people would be surprised if there was an uproar upon the revelation that the CEO of Mozilla (or any company) was a supporter of, say, the KKK. Most everyone would agree that that's an unacceptable "political" belief, such that he should be not be the CEO.

So the question isn't whether Eich's beliefs should be an issue. The question is whether supporting anti-gay marriage legislation goes beyond the line of acceptability. And the public has spoken pretty clearly here. Good for them.

Re: Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week

#53

Post by fletchowns » Fri, Apr 04, 2014, 12:30 AM UTC

carlob wrote: post #11

fletchowns wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not simply an opinion though. Equal rights is fundamentally different than all those other issues you listed.

Immigration policy is also about equal rights...

To an extent, yes. However, restricting the rights of a noncitizen is a lot different than restricting the rights of a homosexual.

Re: Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week

#54

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast » Fri, Apr 04, 2014, 12:49 AM UTC

saraid216 wrote: post #33

avmich wrote: post #2

Gay marriage opinion is the grounds for changing CEO. How about immigration opinion? Animal rights opinion? Climate change opinion? Political views?

I dunno. This seems to be an example of libertarian philosophy actually working . That is, public outcry produced a morality-motivated backlash prompting actual consequences. That's how it's supposed to work, isn't it? If a widget-maker is a bigot, there's supposed to be a boycott while everyone moves over to his competitor so that the bigot goes out of business, right? I agree that this shouldn't have been a controv…

The market is supposed to be a thing that happens to other people.

Re: Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week

#55

Post by wheaties » Fri, Apr 04, 2014, 2:05 AM UTC

heterogenic wrote: post #16

wheaties wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but I have to agree with this. If the purpose of the role is to be the CEO of a company dedicated to open source software then his religion, personal beliefs, and his lifestyle choices should have no bearing on being a CEO. That includes both people who are for AND against gay marriage. We aren't supposed to discriminate on any front when hiring someone so what makes this different?

If he doesn't like gay marriage, he doesn't have to get gay married. But contributing a significant amount of money to take away that option from someone else is wrong. And to believe it's his right to take that option away is wrong. I have a same-sex partner, Brendan is willing to work and make a real effort to take away our recognition. To unmarry our children's parents. To eliminate our shared benefits, and impair…

Actually, in a free democracy, it is his right to go against others beliefs and to contribute campaign money to those who hold similar beliefs to himself. That's what makes this country so great.

Re: Mozilla Chief Steps Down After 1 Week

#56

Post by carlob » Fri, Apr 04, 2014, 6:35 AM UTC

fletchowns wrote: post #53

carlob wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Immigration policy is also about equal rights...

To an extent, yes. However, restricting the rights of a noncitizen is a lot different than restricting the rights of a homosexual.

It is different, but it's not any less an injustice. One could even argue that it's worse in some sense.

Let me play the devil's advocate: an homosexual couple cannot conceive a child, so by giving then them the chance to adopt your somehow extending their natural rights. On the other hand restricting one's freedom of movement because one was born in the wrong country seems completely arbitrary.

Don't get me wrong, I fully support the struggle of homosexuals for equal rights, but why it's considered acceptable to maintain that non-citizens have less rights than citizens escapes me. It should be exposed as xenophobic behavior, exactly like campaigning against homosexual marriage is homophobic.