Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich Steps Down

[StewShearerOld]

Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich Steps Down

Brendan Eich has chosen to depart from his position as CEO at Mozilla.

Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich will be leaving his position in the company. His departure was announced today in a blog post stating that Eich was behind the decision and that he did it for the good of "Mozilla and our community."

While the blog post didn't address the controversy directly, its language would suggest that this may be a response to the Eich's past activism against gay marriage, including a $1000 donation to the California's 2008 Proposition 8 which banned same-sex marriage in the state. These donations were brought into the spotlight when the site OKCupid requested that Firefox users switch browsers to avoid associating with Eich.

Today's blog post, in turn, affirmed that the company "[welcomes] contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

Source: Mozilla

Permalink

 

[jericu]

This is really cool, and especially great considering the number of people in comments of stories about the OKCupid thing saying "Well, not using Mozilla isn't going to change anything, what's the point?"

 

[Avaholic03]

I'm still constantly amazed when people try to be public figures AND be vocal about their controversial opinions. When has that ever worked out for someone?

 

[BrotherRool]

I still don't know how I feel about this. The guy was a founder of Mozilla, created JavaScript and has been a CTO for 9 years. Regardless of personally being a dick he was the guy most qualified to do this job. And in terms of internet specific principles, I can get behind open platforms and all that.

On the other hand he was supporting something that has made many millions of people unhappy.

----------------------------
I don't know, I still don't have any conclusions. Is it right that he never works for a company at the level he is most qualified for again? Is it right for a company to hire someone with such damaging beliefs towards other people?

 

[Nimcha]

I hate hypes so I thought the whole OKCupid thing was stupid.

But I'm impressed it actually made Mozilla scared to lose costumers.

 

[Lightknight]

Alright, good to see public shaming can encourage discriminatory hiring practices in the work place. I guess now Eich has to dissolve into the ether since groups like OKcupid would have him die penniless in a ditch for his personal beliefs.

Yay, fight to end discrimination by encouraging discrimination.

 

[JimbobDa3rd]

This is really cool, and especially great considering the number of people in comments of stories about the OKCupid thing saying "Well, not using Mozilla isn't going to change anything, what's the point?"

Im glad there has been a response from the online community(I actually have started using chrome more this week because of this story) however Im worried that people will confuse this as 'something changing'.

He may no longer be CEO but he still will gain most of the profits from Mozilla,and Id be willing to bet he's still going to 'mentor' whoever does have the new CEO position. This is just a publicity stunt so that people will move on. I still believe it is niave to think that anything we do will cause any real change to this mans personal opinions or to the way he runs his company, we can only raise awareness so that people can make an informed choices about what products they use.

 

[JimbobDa3rd]

This is really cool, and especially great considering the number of people in comments of stories about the OKCupid thing saying "Well, not using Mozilla isn't going to change anything, what's the point?"

Im glad there has been a response from the online community(I actually have started using chrome more this week because of this story) however Im worried that people will confuse this as 'something changing'.

He may no longer be CEO but he still will gain most of the profits from Mozilla,and Id be willing to bet he's still going to 'mentor' whoever does have the new CEO position. This is just a publicity stunt so that people will move on. I still believe it is niave to think that anything we do will cause any real change to this mans personal opinions or to the way he runs his company, we can only raise awareness so that people can make an informed choices about what products they use.

 

[SKBPinkie]

Well done internet *slow clap* you really pulled together to achieve something utterly meaningless and actually helped give credence to the idea that people who don't fall in line with LGBT beliefs are actively hounded and discriminated against, a fallacy long peddled by those who are actually more damaging to that cause.

Except this guy wasn't just someone whose ideas "didn't fall in line with LGBT beliefs". He was someone who actively condemned them and donated to a cause that directly affects their rights.

That being said, I do agree that this is pretty harsh, but there's gotta be another way to encourage support for LGBT stuff, rather than overzealous punishment of the opposite.

 

[JarinArenos]

He may no longer be CEO but he still will gain most of the profits from Mozilla,and Id be willing to bet he's still going to 'mentor' whoever does have the new CEO position. This is just a publicity stunt so that people will move on. I still believe it is niave to think that anything we do will cause any real change to this mans personal opinions or to the way he runs his company, we can only raise awareness so that people can make an informed choices about what products they use.

While I have mixed feelings about the whole controversy, I do think that the positive upshot here isn't about changing one person's personal opinion, but making it publicly unacceptable to express and support bigoted positions. We wouldn't let someone who actively and materially supported causes advocating racial segregation, and that's the point we need to get to in social views on sexual orientation as well.

 

[anthony87]

Well....that's pretty fucking disgraceful. Way to push for those equal rights guys.

 

[Vegosiux]

This is really cool, and especially great considering the number of people in comments of stories about the OKCupid thing saying "Well, not using Mozilla isn't going to change anything, what's the point?"

Well...what did it change? I doubt he's due for the bankruptcy barrel anytime soon; I doubt gay rights are going to improve because he stepped down.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Well done internet *slow clap* you really pulled together to achieve something utterly meaningless and actually helped give credence to the idea that people who don't fall in line with LGBT beliefs are actively hounded and discriminated against, a fallacy long peddled by those who are actually more damaging to that cause.

Except this guy wasn't just someone whose ideas "didn't fall in line with LGBT beliefs". He was someone who actively condemned them and donated to a cause that directly affects their rights.

That being said, I do agree that this is pretty harsh, but there's gotta be another way to encourage support for LGBT stuff, rather than overzealous punishment of the opposite.

A lot of people who don't like OKcupid's stupid publicity stunt to get a man fired, do not agree with the man's views. I personally think the traditional marriage shit is awful, but this kind of conduct on the part of the LGBT movement and it's advocates is wrong. It's not right to black list someone from having a professional career due to the politics they support, or their personal life.

If it's nothing more then public perception of morality that gives anyone the licensee to enact black lists and make people suppressive persons, then discrimination will not end, it'll just change sides. It's either wrong to do this shit, or it isn't.

 

[Alcaste]

Good. Unfortunately, there will be people spouting false equivalences about this, but that's unavoidable I suppose.

All he needed to do was come out and say that what he did was wrong (support oppressive legislature financially) and say he wasn't going to do it again.

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

Alright, good to see public shaming can encourage discriminatory hiring practices in the work place. I guess now Eich has to dissolve into the ether since groups like OKcupid would have him die penniless in a ditch for his personal beliefs.

Yay, fight to end discrimination by encouraging discrimination.

Exactly. It doesn't matter if you're good at your job or have created great products. You believe something that other people don't believe, and since those people have power in today's society, the culture of which is powered by outrage and self-created victimhood, you either have to remove yourself from all aspects of public life or be hounded and sued until the day you die, your reputation and any business you have completely ruined.

 

[Kyogissun]

Well done internet *slow clap* you really pulled together to achieve something utterly meaningless and actually helped give credence to the idea that people who don't fall in line with LGBT beliefs are actively hounded and discriminated against, a fallacy long peddled by those who are actually more damaging to that cause.

Except this guy wasn't just someone whose ideas "didn't fall in line with LGBT beliefs". He was someone who actively condemned them and donated to a cause that directly affects their rights.

That being said, I do agree that this is pretty harsh, but there's gotta be another way to encourage support for LGBT stuff, rather than overzealous punishment of the opposite.

I completely agree, this is entirely uncalled for and I'm disgusted that 'this' was seen as the best possible choice.

Thanks OKCupid, thanks radical SJW's, thanks people in the LGBT community who really aren't part of said community but like to claim they are because they're actually SJW's co-opting the movement for their own personal gains, you just kicked a guy out of a job he probably busted his ass for because he disagreed with you.

I'm not going to say that his donation to prop 8 was right and all that shit, but two wrongs here do 'not' make a right. The people who pushed for this should feel ashamed for not coming up with a more reasonable and efficient solution for this problem you had with this guy.

I am extremely bothered that people are so vigilant in this mentality of 'taking people down' that are otherwise completely harmless, especially considering his donation amount and more importantly, the fact that it failed.

This is not the actions or behavior of adults, this is a childish and immature mentality that we SERIOUSLY need to purge from social justice and activism, because until we do it can never be taken seriously again.

tl;dr I'm all for putting people in there place, but pushing for someone to lose their job like this just seems to be going too far. There's gotta be better ways to handle this people...

Good. Unfortunately, there will be people spouting false equivalences about this, but that's unavoidable I suppose.

All he needed to do was come out and say that what he did was wrong (support oppressive legislature financially) and say he wasn't going to do it again.

That wouldn't have been enough. Internet Social Activists have proven this is the case, especially after whats her name and her reaction to Stephen Colbert's apology. Those may be two different cases, but it's proof positive that the radical mentality outweighs the level headed and calmer activists that probably pushed for his removal from CEO. These people want blood in one way or another and they got it.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Nice to know the mob tactics worked. In the future, please tell me what I'm privately allowed to vote for in order to keep my job. Better still, elections are costly, so better not to bother if we can't respect people's rights to vote for their own desires and values, not our own.

I fully support gay marriage, but this doesn't create support for it. It makes us look like Big Brother out to destroy dissenting thought.

 

[maxben]

Well done internet *slow clap* you really pulled together to achieve something utterly meaningless and actually helped give credence to the idea that people who don't fall in line with LGBT beliefs are actively hounded and discriminated against, a fallacy long peddled by those who are actually more damaging to that cause.

Except this guy wasn't just someone whose ideas "didn't fall in line with LGBT beliefs". He was someone who actively condemned them and donated to a cause that directly affects their rights.

That being said, I do agree that this is pretty harsh, but there's gotta be another way to encourage support for LGBT stuff, rather than overzealous punishment of the opposite.

A lot of people who don't like OKcupid's stupid publicity stunt to get a man fired, do not agree with the man's views. I personally think the traditional marriage shit is awful, but this kind of conduct on the part of the LGBT movement and it's advocates is wrong. It's not right to black list someone from having a professional career due to the politics they support, or their personal life.

If it's nothing more then public perception of morality that gives anyone the licensee to enact black lists and make people suppressive persons, then discrimination will not end, it'll just change sides. It's either wrong to do this shit, or it isn't.

That is such bull, you are hiding what this really is by talking about "traditional marriage". It is about human rights. A CEO who today said, "I'm ok with Black people, I just don't think they should be allowed to marry whites so I've donated a tonne of money to ensure that doesn't happen". "I don't mind Jews, but since their marriage isn't condoned by the Church it's not a real marriage and so should be made illegal, so I've donated a tonne of money to organizations that will ban Jews from being married". I can go extreme cases where we remove other human rights too, but I think these show the point as accurately as possible. If you're ok with individuals in power saying and the above, that's fine but no one on our side of the fence is really going to be swayed by your arguments as they are rather extreme.

On top of that, he wasn't "blacklisted", his company let him go to ensure they don't lose money. That's up to them and is based on economic considerations, meaning that he could not do the work that he was assigned to do as CEO (make them money). To be blacklisted, you first have to be employable and due to a grudge no one hires you. Furthermore, blacklisting would mean that you cannot find work elsewhere. The employers who wouldn't hire him because they are mad at him are very very few number, meaning he could find work elsewhere (though again others won't hire him because he can't do his job as well as other candidates).

 

[The Lunatic]

Pretty dumb.

I'm gay, I get that people dislike it. I agree with your right to state this dislike, just as much as I agree with others rights to state their fondness of it.

I agree with the freedom for people to say and do whatever they like in a reasonable and non-too-harmful way.

Be it voting against something you dislike, protesting for something you want changed, or sending messages to people you disagree with on twitter.

Harmful is a bit of a grey area, as obviously, there are some people whom are more sensitive than others, so, I tend to draw the line at "Actual physical harm or threats".