News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Brendan Eich by blisterpeanuts on Sunday April 06, 2014 @11:28PM (#7544469)
In hindsight, perhaps. But how exactly did it come out that he made that contribution? If someone hadn't uncovered it, would he have outed himself by publicly denigrating gay marriage? Seems highly unlikely.

Many people have skeletons in the closet. While 20-somethings might idealistically believe that people ought to be perfect, especially a CEO, in reality there's simply no such thing.

The political parties are painfully aware of the power of a very thorough background investigation to destroy a candidate's chances, regardless of his or her real qualifications. It has happened thousands of times, and I believe we have damaged our society as a result, by holding every candidate up to an impossibly high standard.

The fact that Eich quietly resigned in the face of what amounts to a smear campaign is a sign of real leadership skills. He has class. He did what was best for Mozilla.

A lesser individual might have made some lame apology to save his job, as demanded by his attackers. I respect that he did not do that, and I'd work for a man like Eich in a heartbeat. I just regret that so many have chosen to politicize Mozilla in this fashion, and I no longer have the slightest respect for the organization.

Re:Brendan Eich by bzbarsky on Sunday April 06, 2014 @11:57PM (#7544556)
I would ask you: how many is "so many"? I saw five Mozilla Foundation employees object to the appointment. Mozilla Corporation employees seemed generally supportive.

What caused the real problems here were the media circus, the rampant lack of fact-checking in said circus, and okcupid's opportunistic publicity-grab.

Re:Brendan Eich by blisterpeanuts on Monday April 07, 2014 @12:16AM (#7544606)
Well, I don't know but apparently it was enough people to tip the scales. Some commenters have asserted that a lot of Mozilla employees were upset by the Prop 8 thing, but I haven't seen any factual numbers, just hazy claims based on the myth that "of course everyone opposed Prop 8".
Re:Brendan Eich by bzbarsky on Monday April 07, 2014 @12:39AM (#7544667)
> but apparently it was enough people to tip the scales

Tip which scales? You seem to be under the misapprehension that there was serious internal pressure for Brendan to resign. There was not.

The problem, of course, is convincing you of that. I can point you to https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat... but of course you can decide to not believe that. I can also tell you that I'm a Mozilla employee (that's a clear matter of public record anyway) so I have some idea what was going on internally, but you don't have to believe me on that either...

> a lot of Mozilla employees were upset by the Prop 8 thing

A lot were. There's a difference between being upset and wanting Brendan to step down, though. So you get posts like http://subfictional.com/2014/03/24/on-brendan-eich-as-ceo-of... and http://www.twobraids.com/2014/04/back-into-light.html and http://incisive.nu/2014/thinking-about-mozilla/ which seem to me like the polar opposite of "politicizing Mozilla".

> but I haven't seen any factual numbers

Dare I say that this is because there aren't any? But "Employees support their new CEO in spite of disagreeing with him on some political issues" makes a much worse story than "Employees revolt against new CEO", so the press ran with the latter, facts be damned.

Re:Brendan Eich by anatoly on Monday April 07, 2014 @01:44AM (#7544834)
I appreciate your efforts to set the facts straight. The FAQ, while straightforward on some points, is vague on one in a way that I can only see as unfortunately intentional.

> Q: Was Brendan asked to resign by the Board?

> A: No. In fact, Board members tried to get Brendan to stay at Mozilla in another role.

You can read this in two ways:

1. The board didn't want Eich to resign as CEO, and when he did, tried to at least get him to remain in another role. 2. The board did want Eich to resign as CEO (but formally it was his decision), and when he did, tried to get him to remain in another role.

My impression, when I read the FAQ, was that it tries to create the impression of 1, but 2 is more likely to have happened. I'm saddened to have confirmed with by reading the NYTimes article which quotes board members precisely to that effect (that they agreed with Eich he should step down as CEO).

The fact that this issue is muddled in the FAQ in a way that seems intentional does not boost my confidence in Mozilla. It isn't as bad as "they plain fired him" which I thought before, but it's still pretty bad.

Re:Brendan Eich by bzbarsky on Monday April 07, 2014 @08:01AM (#7545932)
The correct reading is 1. The vagueness is most definitely not intentional; I'll get in touch with the authors.

There's a difference between "want him to resign" and "agree with his decision to resign once he makes it". My understanding is that Brendan had to actually get pretty angry with the board to get them to agree, fwiw.

Re:Brendan Eich by anatoly on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @03:14AM (#7558065)
I was glad to read this, but then today I noticed a new comment by Eich clarifying that no one tried to convince him to stay as CEO.

http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2014/04/07...

Perhaps your understanding is a little off. Maybe it's a prudent position to go back to not really knowing what happened between Eich and the board.

Anyway, I'm done being angry at Mozilla. You guys are doing an important thing. Calls for a boycott are counterproductive and will only hurt us all. What's done is done.

I just can't quite find it in my heart to support you anymore.

Re:Brendan Eich by bzbarsky on Friday April 11, 2014 @12:26AM (#7571214)
For what it's worth, https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat... has been updated with less weaselly language. So at this point my best guess on what happened is that it was Brendan that first brought up resigning, but the board was quite happy that he did so...
Re:Brendan Eich by BrendanEich on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:55PM (#7590236)
Re:Brendan Eich by anatoly on Monday April 14, 2014 @04:52PM (#7588856)
That seems likely.

I appreciate your continued efforts to bring clarity to the issue.

Re:Brendan Eich by bzbarsky on Thursday April 10, 2014 @03:06PM (#7568915)
I was actually pretty disheartened to read that comment from Brendan, since it directly contradicted what I thought I'd been told by the board members. :(

And no, that does not make me happy.

Re:Brendan Eich by zorpner on Sunday April 06, 2014 @11:44PM (#7544525)
> If someone hadn't uncovered it, would he have outed himself by publicly denigrating gay marriage?

That's what his contribution was. That's literally what he did.

No one is stopping you from admiring Eich, and no one is stopping you from going and working for him. People who were upset by his publicly stated views chose to vocalize that, and to encourage others who felt similarly not to patronize the company he was heading. Is there any part of that process you'd like to prohibit? This is exactly how free speech is supposed to work -- say anything you like, and accept the consequences.

Re:Brendan Eich by blisterpeanuts on Monday April 07, 2014 @12:13AM (#7544600)
What public statements did he make? Kindly share the link; I missed this somehow. It was my understanding that he did not make any public statements about his views on gay marriage but simply donated money to Prop 8, then someone was able to find this out because in California such a donation is public information.
Re:Brendan Eich by zorpner on Monday April 07, 2014 @12:21AM (#7544618)
Are we really doing this? A public contribution to a specific cause is, of course, a statement. Now please, quote the dictionary definition of "statement" back at me to make this HN conversation complete.
Re:Brendan Eich by DanBC on Monday April 07, 2014 @03:17AM (#7545056)
But if they'd had better responses planned maybe he wouldn't have needed to resign.