back to article I QUIT: Mozilla's anti-gay-marriage Brendan Eich leaps out of door

Brendan Eich has stepped down as CEO of Firefox-maker Mozilla Corporation – after it emerged he controversially backed a ballot measure that outlawed same-sex marriage in California. In a blog post on Thursday, Mozilla cofounder and executive chairwoman Mitchell Baker wrote that Eich's decision was voluntary and that he made …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

    1. NomNomNom

      "I'm pretty sure it'd contain words like, "Bigotry", "Hate", "Discrimination" etc"

      Yes it would.

      Boycotting and campaigning are legitimate methods of protest to enact change. Donating to a campaign is legitimate too. These are simply methods.

      However it matters a great deal what is being campaigned for.

      As far as I see it a boycott of someone who wants to stamp out the rights of others is morally wrong and I will attack it, perhaps using words like "Bigotry", "Hate", "Discrimination" etc.

      Whereas a boycott of someone who wants to defend the rights of others is morally right and I will support it.

      There's no contradiction there.

      1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

        Amazing

        "However it matters a great deal what is being campaigned for."

        The most disturbing thing is that you obviously fail to see the dismal immorality of what you just wrote.

        As I said in another thread - your type of campaigners are self-serving parasites, only damaging the cause you are ostensibly fighting for.

        As for the rest of your post - I wonder if it's an honest mistake or a freudian slip?

        1. NomNomNom

          Re: Amazing

          "The most disturbing thing is that you obviously fail to see the dismal immorality of what you just wrote."

          Perhaps you misunderstand me. I am saying boycott and protest should be allowed whatever the cause.

          However I will have personal views as to whether that cause is right or wrong which will determine whether I support or oppose it, but opposing it wouldn't mean preventing them protesting.

          1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

            Re: Amazing

            "Perhaps you misunderstand me."

            Perhaps I do, in which case I apologise.

            "However I will have personal views as to whether that cause is right or wrong which will determine whether I support or oppose it."

            That's fine. But do you agree that you must lose your job if your personal view and the corresponding support or opposition you express are not deemed to be satisfactory?

  1. poohbear

    A question: are gay web developers now no longer using JavaScript?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      OKCupid does... so that's OK then.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Mozilla weren't in my good books

    Mainly because of their stupid design decisions, all the bugs in their code and their tardiness in addressing important security and privacy issues.

    So I guess this doesn't actually make a whole load of difference to how I feel about Mozilla.

    But it's a bad precedent - and it would be a bad precedent whatever the political issue was.

    1. Stevie

      Re: bad precedent whatever the political issue was.

      Like using IE as your browser?

  3. Matthew Taylor

    The unaccountable mob

    I don't blame him for quitting, it was a battle that would have cost him dearly - still, it's disgusting that he was coerced into resigning by a mob who are wholly unaccountable for their actions. "We're just exercising our rights to blah blah blah". No you're not, what you did amounted to a worldwide witchhunt that was beyond disproportionate, and can destroy a person in short order. I believe that pressure groups wield way too much power in this internet-amplified age - they need to be held accountable for that power.

    1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

      Re: The unaccountable mob

      It's actually the same tactics that is commonly used by Scientologists to suppress dissent in their ranks and netralise anyone who they perceive as a threat to their organisation.

  4. codejunky Silver badge

    Well

    I hope they dont hire a catholic next. Nor a muslim. Or anyone who has contributed anything towards any of them (beware the charities). What other groups disagree with homosexuality? Who else can we rule out of a CEO position?

    Personal views and personal beliefs are just that. A company doesnt have beliefs nor views it is a collection of people and all with their own twisted view of the world. If we penalise one for having a view (not for enforcing it on the company) then we may as well penalise everyone for any contribution to any religion/politics or group with any view we disagree with.

  5. Frank Fisher

    It was the Fabian HG Wells who suggest that the Left needed a "liberal Fascism"...

    .... I don't think anyone can deny that this is the world we live in now? The left dominate the airwaves, the media, government, civil service, NGOs - they pay lipservice to free speech but woe betide you if you say anything to upset them or one of their client groups. If gays want marriage they should go through the normal democratic process to achieve that (they didn't do that here in the UK) and when they do that it is *entirely legitimate* for others to oppose them, as Eich did. Without free speech we have no democracy.

    I won't be using firefox in future, not even as a development tool. Will have to figure out other approaches. I don't care to endorse the fascists or their appeasers.

  6. jellypappa
    Pirate

    Animals

    another victory for the gay fascists, who threaten, humilate, and use any tactic they think is legitimate against anyone who doesn't agree with them, i dont care who or what they have sexual relations with, i and many others are sick and fed up with their bullying. disagreeing with any point of view is a personal choice, or has it become compulsory that we must all be in agreement now, we should all be proud and not be made to hide away because we dont agree with what's currently fashionable for PC gestapo.

  7. This post has been deleted by its author

  8. Tank boy
    Mushroom

    Stop it already

    He contributed a measly 1k . With the cash in his pockets, he could have done a lot more. The fact that he quit outright speaks volumes. Whatever. He's probably guilty of a lot worse than sending money to some frivolous campaign, and he knows it.

    One would think a person of his stature would realize that being in a region with deep LGBT communities he would have known better. That's probably why they shitcanned him.

  9. DropBear
    Mushroom

    So he's entitled to his views, is it?

    Fine, then so am I: good riddance, fucker!

  10. Sproing
    Alien

    Has no-one noticed

    ... this guy was one of the EICH, people! Eichbren is now returned to the noisome depths of Eddore, confident his task of sowing discord amongst us is complete - and he's right.

  11. The New Turtle
    Unhappy

    OK, time to abandon Mozilla - which browser company supports its employees?

  12. NomNomNom

    so much gaycism

  13. McHack

    Now boycott Islam

    I think it's more serious to kill, flog, mutilate, or imprison a person than to merely deny them marriage with whom they want.

    So what shall these brave defenders of equality do next? Shall they insist the US and allies stay in Afghanistan until the Taliban is defeated thus prevented from killing more homosexuals? Shall they demand the continuing and deepening of economic sanctions against Iran until they cease the slaughtering as well?

    Shall they at least boycott Saudi Arabian oil and all companies who buy it?

    Or are quick and easy symbolic wins the only ones they will fight for?

    1. NomNomNom

      Re: Now boycott Islam

      By all means go after those who kill, flog, mutilate, or imprison a person, but saying "boycott islam" is wrong as it is stereotyping a minority in your country. At worse your comment could be seen as an attempt to defend the stamping on the rights of one minority by playing them off against another minority.

      Also if someone wants to defend the rights of a minority, such as the right of gays to marriage, that should be encouraged. Please don't try turning it into a bad thing by accusing them of not defending other minority rights elsewhere. There's no requirement that individuals must prioritize what they work for, it's possible for an individual to focus on specific issues even if bigger picture there are more pressing subjects. This is true of all parts of life. Also if you must argue priorities, then rather than criticizing rights campaigners for not prioritizing correctly, wouldn't it be more productive for you to criticize those who stamp on rights instead?

    2. Matthew Taylor

      Re: Now boycott Islam

      I heartily concur - the gay lobby should have a crack at radical Islam, anything else would be rank hypocrisy. I won't hold my breath though. No doubt the gay lobby will say "we need to pick our battles".

      That said, it would certainly be quite a show!

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Now boycott Islam

        @ Matthew Taylor

        "I heartily concur - the gay lobby should have a crack at radical Islam, anything else would be rank hypocrisy."

        You are not quite right. This guy only donated to a cause. So all who contribute to islam would need to be opposed. Also anyone who donates to any of their charities or contributes to them regardless of their association. And of course Christians have the same problem. And I am sure many other groups. Probably a majority of people with differing views that someone doesnt agree with.

        I too would love to see that show

  14. Irongut

    This is a bad day for Mozilla and the web

    Brendan Eich is a very clever guy and one of the people who has shaped the web since its early days. His personal opinions on non-related matters have nothing to do with his fitness as a programmer or CEO.

    1. A J Stiles

      Re: This is a bad day for Mozilla and the web

      Not clever enough to keep his odious opinions to himself.

  15. DropBear
    Unhappy

    I'd like to thank El Reg...

    ...for this unique opportunity to witness first hand how a majority invariably starts feeling threatened and oppressed as soon as their ability to threaten and oppress at will any minority (in the name of ferociously preserving their beloved status quo they call "values", "traditions" and "way of life") starts becoming unfashionable. The uniqueness comes not so much from the act itself (which can be broadly experienced live even today in some parts of the world - even Europe), but from the fact that this seem to be happening virtually identically among a mob of feral sports fans and people who are assumed to be "on the favourable side of the bell curve" intellectually, as it has been noted. Sadly, I find that hooking up the evolve-o-meter across the centuries passed since the times of the inquisition, the needle hardly even quivers from zero...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I'd like to thank El Reg... @DropBear

      Now in English please

  16. Matt Bryant Silver badge
    FAIL

    Argument vs oppression, and the Pyrrhic victory.

    There are two approaches to combatting homophobia (or racism, or any other form of discrimination); firstly, there is argument, where you set out a coherent position and discuss the situation with the homophobe, and convince them they are wrong; the second option is to use the hammer of public opinion to bash at the homophobic, hounding them and damaging their lives. The former is the only way to actually change minds, the latter only causes resentment and deepens the opposition to equality. I'm not saying Eich was a homophobe, though the PC Brigade seem intent on labeling him just that, but do you really think Eich is going away from this thinking "gee, I deserve that, I must change my outlook", or the more likely "what I did was legal, I did not do wrong, why should I accept this"? Driving homophobic thought underground will not eradicate it, it will merely convince homophobes that they are right to fear the gay agenda, that the right to free speech is being unfairly removed. Eich did not make a massive donation to the Klan, he made a small donation in a legal and democratic process, and one that was actually in agreement with the majority of Californians. He was well within his legal rights to do so, it was not an illegal action nor a hate crime, no matter how badly the PC Brigade want to paint it so. Do you want to think what his possible future actions could be should he really make use of his resources? Do you think he is more or less likely to be "anti-gay" now he has been subjected to the hate hammer? Would it not have been a bigger victory to have someone in Eich's position partake in a calm and open public discussion, to have exposed the actual reasons for his donation and his underlying beliefs, and to have won the argument by virtue of intelligence? Or is it just a lot easier and more fun to reach for the hate hammer?

    1. NomNomNom

      Re: Argument vs oppression, and the Pyrrhic victory.

      "that the right to free speech is being unfairly removed"

      He was and still is free to say anything. His right to free speech has not been taken way. But what he never had was a right to speech without consequence. People are free to take action - within the law - in legitimate protest, through boycotts, against anyone who says something they don't like.

      "Eich did not make a massive donation to the Klan, he made a small donation in a legal and democratic process"

      To a cause that sought to suppress the rights of others. But yes that's legal and democratic. But so too is a protest response.

      "He was well within his legal rights to do so, it was not an illegal action nor a hate crime"

      Neither was boycotting his company and getting him fired from his job.

      You can say is it was mean of those protesters to get him fired, which is what I think has everyone riled up. Because as an individual we empathize with him for being forced out his job by a nameless mob of protesters. So by all means argue it was mean to do this, but not that it was a violation of his rights.

      "Would it not have been a bigger victory to have someone in Eich's position partake in a calm and open public discussion, to have exposed the actual reasons for his donation and his underlying beliefs, and to have won the argument by virtue of intelligence? Or is it just a lot easier and more fun to reach for the hate hammer?"

      You could similarly wonder why did Eich donate to a group that seeks to prevent gays from marrying through campaigning? Would it not have been better for him to "partake in a calm and open public discussion and to have won the argument by virtue of intelligence"?

      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: NomNomNom Re: Argument vs oppression, and the Pyrrhic victory.

        ".....You could similarly wonder why did Eich donate to a group that seeks to prevent gays from marrying through campaigning? Would it not have been better for him to "partake in a calm and open public discussion and to have won the argument by virtue of intelligence"?" That's simply avoiding the point. Two wrongs do not make a right even if you want to claim the donation was a "wrong". The whole Caitlin protest simply comes across (IMHO) as vindictive rather than constructive - Eich made the donation six years ago, I cannot find any example of his making any anti-gay statement or action of any form since; Prop8 was overturned and Caitlin and the gay community got what they wanted, gay marriage (and the Green Card that seems to have been their prime motivation). So revisiting the issue now simply looks like spiteful vengeance dressed up as moral superiority. As far as I can discern, Eich had not made any statement or action as a Mozilla employee that could be construed as anti-gay or discriminatory, and he seems to be technically competent, so the whole push to get him bitchslapped out of his job seems to be nothing more than "we're going to hurt you because we can", and if anyone disagrees they get labelled a homophobe too. As I said before, do you really think this intolerance/vindictiveness changed any actual homophobic opinions or just reinforced them?

      2. Septeon

        Re: Argument vs oppression, and the Pyrrhic victory.

        "You could similarly wonder why did Eich donate to a group that seeks to prevent gays from marrying through campaigning? Would it not have been better for him to "partake in a calm and open public discussion and to have won the argument by virtue of intelligence"?"

        ---------------

        You do understand, that it's not the same.

        Eich donated to politicians because they may represent his point of view much better.

        It is the aim of donations, obviously.

        His personal profile was not in a political field.

        Politicians are "rented" for that.

        His action was not directed to ruin life or career of specific person.

        So his "calming" is natural, but further "consequence" were pure bigoting, in real.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Argument vs oppression, and the Pyrrhic victory.

        one can say exactly the same thing about gay marriage. But no one will.

        No one sends SWAT teams to take down "illegal" gay marriages. Anyone "free" to exercise their marriage right after being fired or chased out of a job would bring screaming legions of support while all those defenders of "he can still say what he wants" always forget their position.

  17. Intractable Potsherd

    No-one will ever read this because it is currently on p5 ...

    ... but I'd like to go on record as saying that I also am appalled at the treatment of Eich by Mozilla. However, I am not a "hateful bigot" - I contributed time, effort and money to supporting gay marriage in the UK. I wrote to my (anti-gay marriage) MP numerous times to try to get him to do the right thing *as I saw it*. I helped pay for advertising to support the introduction, despite gay friends expressing their disapproval of the measure. So, again, I am not a hateful bigot, Mr Blaise.

    Eich *has* been hounded from a job by a concerted, vocal minority who cannot recognise that an opinion is valid even when you disagree with it, and acting in a small way to support a campaign that runs contrary to your own (and, in this case, many years ago) does not necessarily affect the ability to do a job. I am somewhat ashamed that the people I have supported have acted so intolerantly.

    1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

      Re: No-one will ever read this because it is currently on p5 ...

      "a concerted, vocal minority who cannot recognise that an opinion is valid even when you disagree with it"

      We have good few of them on this board as well...

  18. A J Stiles

    Good riddance!

    And don't let the door whack you in the behind on your way out.

    ProTip: If you must be a queer-basher, keep it to yourself. Or if you do go around showing off socially-unacceptable behaviour in public, then you shouldn't be surprised when you find yourself no longer socially accepted.

    1. southpacificpom
      Mushroom

      Re: Good riddance!

      You have just rendered yourself socially unacceptable. How does it feel?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Good riddance!

      He kinda did you loudmouthed dick.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How dare they!

    I'm a vegetarian: I DEMAND any meat eating CEOs of any company I might use products of to STEP DOWN IMMEDIATELY!

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: AC Re: How dare they!

      "I'm a vegetarian: I DEMAND any meat eating CEOs of any company I might use products of to STEP DOWN IMMEDIATELY!" Several years ago I was witness to a bizarre tempest tantrum by a militant veggie in the frozen aisle of a well-known supermarket chain. The member of the Thought Police was very loudly complaining that having chilled meat products in the same chiller as chilled veggie products was WRONG, trampled her rights and caused her offence. The poor manager was trying to explain to her that the chillier layouts came down from HQ and all his staff did was stack it as they were told to, he was certain no offence was intended and was apologetic for any offence taken, but he was not going to start changing the chiller layout. The militant stamped off, shrieking that she would write to the management, start a campaign, and THEN THE WORLD WOULD BOYCOTT THE CHAIN! Last time I check the chain was still in business so I suppose she just couldn't make out her rights were being trampled enough....

      1. Septeon

        Re: AC How dare they!

        ///"I'm a vegetarian: I DEMAND any meat eating CEOs of any company I might use products of to STEP DOWN IMMEDIATELY!" ///

        ---------------------

        Bright example of absurd in our life

  20. The Axe

    Tyranny of the minority

    The shouty minority wins by being shouty.

    1. McHack

      Re: Tyranny of the minority

      oppressed_minority := oppressing_minority

  21. AngryCTO

    Shame!

    His forced resignation as CEO is a real shame. It is similar to he being forced to resign for supporting gays, but worse, as this is is reverse discrimination of a member of the majority by a very aggresive minority.

    Forcing someone out of job for their political / personal views is a bad move no matter the affiliation. The only criterias should have been technical and managerial skills, which he had a lot. The board proved cowardice. Mozilla will pay their mishandling of the online lynching by stagnation or decline, as they will adopt a CEO with better social skills, and less technical skill.

    Gay marriage is very much a political issue, because it has no clear "truth", as opposed to sexual liberty. It is generally accepted that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of the bedroom is nobody's business but their own. However marriage is a public institution, strictly correlated with making and raising kids for most of human history. It has little to no sense besides it.

    And btw, anybody who watches politics today knows that many people have absolutely NO shame to twist the facts, the truths and throw tantrums for their political ends. Why should we pay the shameless mob any attention?

  22. Tech Curmudgeon

    Firefox, the gay browser.......

    1. southpacificpom
      Pint

      More correctly,

      Firefox the dying browser...

  23. Phil W

    Similarities

    Just wondering if I'm the only one (in the UK at least) who is seeing the similarity between this and the recent news regarding certain politicians and their vague historical affiliation to PIE (Paedophile Information Exchange)?

    Notably in those cases no-one was fired/forced to step down as a result. They simply said, "I regret my vague historical association with this awful organisation" and that was the end of it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Similarities

      I think in a way that was the opposite: Harriet Harman &al were attacked for being part of an organisation (NCCL) which accepted affiliation from various minority groups who wanted protection for their "rights", whereas Eich is attacked for donating to a cause that was trying to legislate to remove rights from a particular group. The similarity is that the "majority" thought the "minority" rights unacceptable in both cases *at the time* but now PIE is universally recognised as wrong (one hopes) and gay marriage is (largely) recognised as right.

      The unpleasant part is that in both cases, people acting according to their consciences *at the time* are now pilloried apparently without much opportunity to make a reasoned argument that they think differently now. As someone once said, let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    really cannot see what the fuss is about

    Mozilla is not some government department, it's a corporation.

    The CEO is free to support whatever political causes he likes.

    Anyone else is free to demand he be fired if they don't like that.

    The CEO is entitled to resign if he wants to. And the board are entitled to fire him if they want to.

    And all the people whining about freedom can organize a boycott to have him restored, if they want to.

    1. Matthew Taylor

      Re: really cannot see what the fuss is about

      All these things that you said are true - everyone has plenty of freedoms and rights. The problems are twofold.

      Firstly, there is the problem of conflating someone's private political opinions with their role in an unrelated industry. Brendan Eich didn't publicise his views during the 15 years he was at Mozilla, nor is there any evidence to suggest that he was about to start, having become CEO. His donation was discovered through an investigation. People have a right to private opinions that differ from other people's, and unless Brendan Eich, as CEO of Mozilla, were to begin enacting policies which discriminated against gay people, he has done nothing wrong.

      Secondly, evidently the power of the gay lobby is considerable. They seem capricious, and have demonstrated a willingness to use quite disproportionate tactics, yet they are accountable to no-one. This sort of behaviour amouonts to a kind of extra-legal chilling effect on public discourse, and that's no good.

    2. Septeon

      Re: really cannot see what the fuss is about

      "And all the people whining about freedom can organize a boycott to have him restored, if they want to."

      --------------------

      May be it is not bad idea to deal with...

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like