LXer: Why Mozilla's Brendan Eich Is the Right Choice for CEO
Syndicated Linux NewsThis forum is for the discussion of Syndicated Linux News stories.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
LXer: Why Mozilla's Brendan Eich Is the Right Choice for CEO
Published at LXer:
Finally. At long last and after two CEOs who left after short tenures on the job, Mozilla now has the CEO it always should have had.Today, Mozilla officially announced that Brendan Eich will be the new CEO of the open-source organization that produces the Firefox Web browser and the FirefoxOS mobile operating system.
"MOB RULE: MOZILLA CEO FORCED OUT OVER $1000 PROP 8 DONATION MADE SIX YEARS AGO"
"Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard."
What about Brendan Eich's "freedom of speech"? Mozilla = Fail
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
A strict constructionist would also point out that the First Amendment applies to Congress, not to corporate boards.
Mozilla's Board and a good part of its staff decided that Eich's continued tenure would be hurtful to Mozilla; they are within their rights to make that decision, just as others are free to disapprove. Mozilla acted in its self-interest as a corporation; no doubt Ayn Rand would have approved.
"Beginning with Gitlow v. New York (1925), the Supreme Court applied the First Amendment to states—a process known as incorporation—through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
You are correct of course, the board has a perfect right to bow to societal pressure if it so desires. Standing for free speech is so much harder than knuckling under.
A "Powerful Conservative Voices" screed about how OkcCupid and many of Mozilla's own employees are just like Hitler? The point it's trying to make is the same one I made in another post, but still, ohhhkay...
Also, the screed outright declares that he was fired. He wasn't.
I would less cynical about conservative defenders of "free speech" if they also defended the free speech for, say, for example, just to mention some ferinstances, Phil Donahue and the Dixie Chicks, among others.
What it means is people who claim to be OPEN MINDED are in fact the worst.
Yes, the Constitution does allow one free association. This is not a freedom of speech issue. It is the fact that a private person using their private money has been barred by using what amounts to a "morals clause." The Supreme Court barred "morals clauses" in hiring/employment in the 60's. I'd have sued them.
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 7,680
Rep:
He was a bad advert for them, so they had to let him go. They made a business decision. His past conduct would damage the reputation of the project.
Some of us realise that airing strong views in public with our names attached (which such a donation does) can cause us problems with employment at a later date, so we don't do it.
I can't decide whether he's a moron because he thinks that people aren't created equal or because he publicly made that statement. Either way, he's still a moron.
"MOB RULE: MOZILLA CEO FORCED OUT OVER $1000 PROP 8 DONATION MADE SIX YEARS AGO"
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbell
Mozilla's Board and a good part of its staff decided that Eich's continued tenure would be hurtful to Mozilla; Mozilla acted in its self-interest as a corporation
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefro
It is the fact that a private person using their private money has been barred by using what amounts to a "morals clause."
Quote:
Originally Posted by 273
He was a bad advert for them, so they had to let him go.
Every single quote above has turned out to either explicitly inaccurate, or speculation.
@dugan From your link: "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."
Emphasis mine. Doesn't sound like a hell of a lot of support to me. It appears Eich voluntarily resigned to prevent further harm to a project dear to him. Kudos.
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 7,680
Rep:
To add to the previous -- I stated that they had to lety him go. I don't see anywhere stated that they begged him to stay in the CEO role.
Organisations rarely fire people at that level but that doesn't mean somebody has much choice but to fall on their sword.
So, I stand by ny statement that the "let him go" as he would cause adverse publicity.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
