Mozilla CEO quits......
-
@Bill-Kindle said:
It just seems a little hypocritical to me that you can have someone get fired and shamed for opposing something but as long as you are supporting the 'right' side you are viewed as a righteous champion of a cause.
I don't think it's a case of right or wrong. It's just a controversial cause. And when it's controversial you will get boycotts. And boycotts are bad for business, hence he goes. If Kim Jong-un created a really cool browser, I'd have a hard time using it.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@Bill-Kindle said:
It just seems a little hypocritical to me that you can have someone get fired and shamed for opposing something but as long as you are supporting the 'right' side you are viewed as a righteous champion of a cause.
I don't think it's a case of right or wrong. It's just a controversial cause. And when it's controversial you will get boycotts. And boycotts are bad for business, hence he goes. If Kim Jong-un created a really cool browser, I'd have a hard time using it.
I think if any temperamental five year old made a browser it would be hard to use.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I think if any temperamental five year old made a browser it would be hard to use.
I'll get my daughter to make one this weekend, and report back.
-
Good - I saw a good comment on reddit about it: Would there be this much controversy if he'd contributed to the KKK or something similar?
-
@Nic said:
Good - I saw a good comment on reddit about it: Would there be this much controversy if he'd contributed to the KKK or something similar?
Who know's. I'm just leery of selective outrage.
-
@Bill-Kindle said:
@Nic said:
Good - I saw a good comment on reddit about it: Would there be this much controversy if he'd contributed to the KKK or something similar?
Who know's. I'm just leery of selective outrage.
What outrage isn't selective?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Bill-Kindle said:
@Nic said:
Good - I saw a good comment on reddit about it: Would there be this much controversy if he'd contributed to the KKK or something similar?
Who know's. I'm just leery of selective outrage.
What outrage isn't selective?
I'm outraged at everything!
-
Fury is best served unbridled.
-
@Bill-Kindle
No it does not make them Mozillas. Mozilla is a business, it does not have any religion. No matter what. -
@scottalanmiller
He wasn't CEO when he donated the money. -
@Chad-K. said:
@scottalanmiller
He wasn't CEO when he donated the money.Does that matter? He chose to impact his career and the board opted to allow it to have happened.
Just like things you say online or tattoos you are making a permanent decision when you do these things. Honestly it makes him an idiot and a bad candidate for CEO - it shows a horrible understanding of actions and consequences. Not a failing one wants in a leader.
-
-
@Bill-Kindle
It's hypocritical to be against equality personally and work for an organization that promotes it. People will look at the situation and say "How long until he changes the organization in a way that pulls it away from where it is and toward those views that are in opposition to the companies history and stated ambitions". This isn't good for business. -
@Nic said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Bill-Kindle said:
@Nic said:
Good - I saw a good comment on reddit about it: Would there be this much controversy if he'd contributed to the KKK or something similar?
Who know's. I'm just leery of selective outrage.
What outrage isn't selective?
I'm outraged at everything!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Chad-K. said:
@scottalanmiller
He wasn't CEO when he donated the money.Does that matter? He chose to impact his career and the board opted to allow it to have happened.
Just like things you say online or tattoos you are making a permanent decision when you do these things. Honestly it makes him an idiot and a bad candidate for CEO - it shows a horrible understanding of actions and consequences. Not a failing one wants in a leader.
Only in that he didn't do it as CEO -
@Chad-K. said:
@Bill-Kindle
It's hypocritical to be against equality personally and work for an organization that promotes it. People will look at the situation and say "How long until he changes the organization in a way that pulls it away from where it is and toward those views that are in opposition to the companies history and stated ambitions". This isn't good for business.But at the same time doesn't it alienate the same people who may hold different beliefs? Isn't that the same thing? like role reversal?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Chad-K. said:
@scottalanmiller
He wasn't CEO when he donated the money.Does that matter? He chose to impact his career and the board opted to allow it to have happened.
Just like things you say online or tattoos you are making a permanent decision when you do these things. Honestly it makes him an idiot and a bad candidate for CEO - it shows a horrible understanding of actions and consequences. Not a failing one wants in a leader.
So he does something long before he was a CEO. I've made some bad decisions life (who hasn't?) but does that make me an eternal idiot and unqualified to run a company?
-
If it is on this scale, which is pretty huge, yes, it would generally disqualify you from running a public company or being a spokesperson for one. People who intend to make CEO a career objective have to be planning for that their entire life. No different than running for office.
-
@Bill-Kindle said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Chad-K. said:
@scottalanmiller
He wasn't CEO when he donated the money.Does that matter? He chose to impact his career and the board opted to allow it to have happened.
Just like things you say online or tattoos you are making a permanent decision when you do these things. Honestly it makes him an idiot and a bad candidate for CEO - it shows a horrible understanding of actions and consequences. Not a failing one wants in a leader.
So he does something long before he was a CEO. I've made some bad decisions life (who hasn't?) but does that make me an eternal idiot and unqualified to run a company?
He could have survived if he'd apologized. But he gave a non-apology, which means he's still a homophobe.
@Bill-Kindle said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Chad-K. said:
@scottalanmiller
He wasn't CEO when he donated the money.Does that matter? He chose to impact his career and the board opted to allow it to have happened.
Just like things you say online or tattoos you are making a permanent decision when you do these things. Honestly it makes him an idiot and a bad candidate for CEO - it shows a horrible understanding of actions and consequences. Not a failing one wants in a leader.
So he does something long before he was a CEO. I've made some bad decisions life (who hasn't?) but does that make me an eternal idiot and unqualified to run a company?
-
Remember, political contributions are public record. This is him doing something voluntary that has similarities to an arrest record. It was a massive, foolish professional risk. And for what purpose?
This is someone who wanted to promote this agenda so strongly that he willingly risked his career over it. This isn't drinking too much on a weekend. This isn't a tattoo. This is truly a big deal both in his actions and his understanding of their ramifications to himself and his employer.
