Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich Steps Down

[Atmos Duality]

Morality, politics, business.
They oldest point of origin of social conflict.

Even with such a "graceful" departure, it's still an ugly subject.

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

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.

Well, he is a CEO, and if all entertainment media (including video games) have taught us anything, it's that businessmen are the source of all the evil in the world and need to be killed before they can spawn. I mean, you almost sound like working hard and making good products means you get to have more money than other people. That just can't be right... I was taught in high school and college that when people have money and high-powered jobs, it's because they stole and screwed over people to get there.

 

[Ninmecu]

Dude made a 10k donation(which let's be honest, is a drop in the bucket for a political campaign) 6 years ago(Give or take, I might be recollecting poorly.) and we're holding his belief against him, when he has since not spoken out in a public manner against LGBT community, and some of you expect he should have publicly apologized for having held a discriminating belief during a time where it was considered normal(No less wrong, don't get me wrong.)? If he had made said donation less than a year ago, fine, take him to the cleaners for being a general dick, but come on, seriously?

 

[anthony87]

Dude made a 10k donation

Was it 10? I read somewhere that it was 1k but that could've easily been a typo.

 

[Yuri Albuquerque]

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.

It isn't meaningless to show that funding anti-LGBT laws will be frowned upon and even economically punished.

 

[Ninmecu]

Dude made a 10k donation

Was it 10? I read somewhere that it was 1k but that could've easily been a typo.

I might be mistaken, some sources say 10k, others say 1k, hell, if it's 1k, that's even more of a drop in the bucket. I don't agree with the movement, it changes absolutely NOTHING. We as a society have largely moved forward and claimed "LGBT" are just as ok as the rest of us Hetero. But, we still live in a puritan society, which is hilariously awkward from my point of view.

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.

It isn't meaningless to show that funding anti-LGBT laws will be frowned upon and even economically punished.

6 bloody years ago. Different times.

 

[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.

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).

I don't agreeeeee with this position. I don't support this position. I'm ON your side of the fucking fence in terms of what I think SHOULD happen. I just have the foresight to allow people the right to have stupid opinions, or opinions I don't agree with without thinking it's okay that they get fired for it when it has nothing to do with their job.

ALSO how is this not blacklisting? You accept that it's okay that a man can be publicly shamed and lead to his removal from a job, but you think this can't happen again? Like the next job he takes, what if people continue to hound him? Sure he's got the money to probably just retire, but if you think the behavior here was acceptable when is no longer acceptable?

 

[chronobreak]

Absolutely disgusting that he had to go as far as to step down. I hope he can bounce back from this and chalk it up as a lesson learned in the way our current society operates. Seriously, this makes me sick- but the difference is I'm not going to go attack anyone for their beliefs and call for their head, because I know myself and millions of other people all over the world will see this for what it really is.

 

[jehk]

I don't agreeeeee with this position. I don't support this position. I'm ON your side of the fucking fence in terms of what I think SHOULD happen. I just have the foresight to allow people the right to have stupid opinions, or opinions I don't agree with without thinking it's okay that they get fired for it when it has nothing to do with their job.

ALSO how is this not blacklisting? You accept that it's okay that a man can be publicly shamed and lead to his removal from a job, but you think this can't happen again? Like the next job he takes, what if people continue to hound him? Sure he's got the money to probably just retire, but if you think the behavior here was acceptable when is no longer acceptable?

He actively supported oppression. That's more then just having a stupid opinion. He deserves everything he gets.

 

[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.

It isn't meaningless to show that funding anti-LGBT laws will be frowned upon and even economically punished.

Well it's not meaningless sure. It shows people that your movement is petty, and goes below the belt for going after what people do as private individuals and not as a business. Something typically considered off limits in polite society, and what most people think as irrelevant to a person's performance in their job.

 

[The Material Sheep]

I don't agreeeeee with this position. I don't support this position. I'm ON your side of the fucking fence in terms of what I think SHOULD happen. I just have the foresight to allow people the right to have stupid opinions, or opinions I don't agree with without thinking it's okay that they get fired for it when it has nothing to do with their job.

ALSO how is this not blacklisting? You accept that it's okay that a man can be publicly shamed and lead to his removal from a job, but you think this can't happen again? Like the next job he takes, what if people continue to hound him? Sure he's got the money to probably just retire, but if you think the behavior here was acceptable when is no longer acceptable?

He actively supported oppression. That's more then just having a stupid opinion. He deserves everything he gets.

Well it's good to show every person who's on the fence about gay marriage, that the movement is controlled by zealots who'd just as quickly resort to witch hunts and purges for the sake of weeding out oppressors.

It also shows that the movement can't stay rational when faced with differing opinions, and resorts to the very things it denounced when it was happening to them.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

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.

Well said. If it was a gay man being pressured to step down by 'One Million Mums' or something, the internet justice crowd would be sharpening their pitchforks. But somehow the reverse is okay?

I'm all for gay marriage, but I'm also keen on people being allowed to hold private views that don't impact on their professional dealings.

 

[The Material Sheep]

You know the trouble with empathy? You can't teach it by shaking your fists and screaming. I highly doubt Eich has come away from this with a positive outlook on the LGBT community. Odds are, he's come away even more hateful and just plain bitter now. On top of that, he's made himself look like the good guy by stepping down and protecting his employees who may not share his views, so they don't have to burn with him. Now, all you have to do is add the fact that absolutely nothing has been accomplished in the field of gay rights, and you've got a good old fashioned fuck up.

Believe me, I'm right there along with everybody else that says Eich was a dummy for funding prop 8. It was an insult to every single rational person on the planet, and it was an absolute joke that a country that calls itself free ever even opened up the possibility of it being legalized. However, I think the goal larger queer movement should be to teach and to help understand, not to demand heads just because somebody didn't agree with us that one time. We need less witch-hunting and reverse-shaming, and more of this:

Spoiler

We can't teach the idiotic masses anything by being just as close-minded as they are. Although, I suppose we should be allowed some close-mindedness, after all, we're not the ones treating them like animals just because of their sexual orientation.

That is perfect... I 100% agree with everything you said. That video is also so awesome, and is everything I wish the LGBT movement would be/continue to be. We're all people here. We don't need more division through these witch hunts and social black listing. We need rational discourse and understanding of shared humanity.

 

[jehk]

I don't agreeeeee with this position. I don't support this position. I'm ON your side of the fucking fence in terms of what I think SHOULD happen. I just have the foresight to allow people the right to have stupid opinions, or opinions I don't agree with without thinking it's okay that they get fired for it when it has nothing to do with their job.

ALSO how is this not blacklisting? You accept that it's okay that a man can be publicly shamed and lead to his removal from a job, but you think this can't happen again? Like the next job he takes, what if people continue to hound him? Sure he's got the money to probably just retire, but if you think the behavior here was acceptable when is no longer acceptable?

He actively supported oppression. That's more then just having a stupid opinion. He deserves everything he gets.

Well it's good to show every person who's on the fence about gay marriage, that the movement is controlled by zealots who'd just as quickly resort to witch hunts and purges for the sake of weeding out oppressors.

It also shows that the movement can't stay rational when faced with differing opinions, and resorts to the very things it denounced when it was happening to them.

What do you think happened here? There was nothing but well placed outrage at someone supporting oppression (which is way worse than just holding an opinion). There were no witch hunts. No zealots. No purges. The guy stepped down at the behest of the company he worked for.

 

[ThatDarnCoyote]

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.

Yup.

This is how I can tell I'm getting old: I can actually remember a time when liberals thought that hounding someone from public life for having a controversial opinion was a bad thing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist]. Can you imagine?

I support gay marriage. I think Prop 8 was stupid, and would have voted against it had I lived in California. I still find it kind of amazing that anyone who holds essentially the same opinion that Barack Obama expressed in 2008 [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/3375059/Barack-Obama-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman.html] is now considered an unconscionable bigot.

To all the people cheering this news: just pray none of your opinions ever become unfashionable.

 

[hentropy]

He was likely forced out after he refused to come out with a definitive statement against discrimination. It's one thing to just leave it up to the PR department to come up with a statement for the company. In any case, I don't think they just forced him out for damage control, but rather because he wasn't willing to do something sincere to address the controversy.

In any case, it's not like he built Mozilla/FireFox from the ground-up, he's a business executive and will be able to get a job elsewhere in all likelihood. Overreactions on all sides are to be expected, but CEOs are ditched and reacquired quite easily these days. If a company has a few bad quarters or doesn't get along well with the board they get booted as well. It's not like he was drawn and quartered publicly, he'll continue to live in fabulous wealth until he finds a new place to take charge of that isn't as public-facing and reliant on good PR. This will in no way "ruin his life", and suggesting such just shows how little the whiners know about the business world.

 

[Kinitawowi]

he's a business executive and will be able to get a job elsewhere in all likelihood.

And some group will find his new job and say "he said this seven years ago, so we'll boycott the company until he's hounded out". And then it will happen again in six more months. And then again in six more.

That's what equality means now, folks - the right to demand the destruction of a person because they don't agree with you.

Spoiler: I'll leave this video here.

 

[Flatfrog]

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.

I understand what you're saying, but nevertheless I still can't help feeling this is a step forward. We've reached the stage where being (publicly) homophobic makes your job untenable. Considering how recently it would have been that being (publicly) homosexual would have the same effect, I think that's progress.

Let's put this into context. He wasn't being bullied or hounded (at least, not as far as I'm aware!). What was happening was that significant numbers of people said 'I won't support this product because I disapprove of their choice of CEO'. That's market forces right there.

Now, it could be argued that this is also discrimination. But I don't think that really follows. There's a big difference between boycotting something because of someone's political views and doing so because of their gender or sexual orientation. Because expressing disapproval of someone's views is a call for them to change their mind, which you can't do in the other cases.(And let's not forget that plenty of groups boycott in the other direction)

I think OkCupid had every right to stand up for their beliefs and to trust that their readership would be behind them.

 

[Scorpid]

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?

I'll tell you where i fall. The guy from what i've read did indeed have an opinion but professionally he did not attack his LGBT coworkers, he did not try to fire them and didn't reverse the stated pro LGBT rights of his company. And beyond that he was qualified. He showed his support for something as quietly as possible and then because of that was driven out of a position he was perfectly suitable for. So I do feel this is unjustified for him. The summation of a persons character is not his opinion on ONE SINGLE subject.

 

[hentropy]

he's a business executive and will be able to get a job elsewhere in all likelihood.

And some group will find his new job and say "he said this seven years ago, so we'll boycott the company until he's hounded out". And then it will happen again in six more months. And then again in six more.

That's what equality means now, folks - the right to demand the destruction of a person because they don't agree with you.

Spoiler: I'll leave this video here.

Mozilla is a company that relies entirely on having a good public image. People don't pay for their products so much of the battle has to do with perception. Ask Wal-Mart or the variety of companies how much they care about perception. It registers, sure, but it's all manageable, and there's plenty of industries he can work in where 0 people will care about an Internet boycott. Mozilla, however, has to care about what the Internet thinks.

And it's not like OKCupid forced anyone to do anything. They informed customers about the man's political beliefs. There's not even any evidence to suggest that it had an effect on Mozilla, but Mozilla decided to do it. They could have ignored it, and it likely wouldn't have effected their business in the long run, but they still decided to do it.

In the end, people DO have the civil right to boycott something based on whatever they feel is important. It's then up to the company to decide what to do about it. No one was being hounded, no one was being harassed. If he really believed he couldn't get a job elsewhere then he likely would have done anything he could have to keep his job, but he didn't. That's also his choice, not an act of force by anyone else.