
OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox - thu
http://www.okcupid.com/home
======
gojomo
And if this doesn't work, eventually when you try to message a Catholic,
Mormon, Muslim, or other religiously-observant person from a denomination
whose leaders publicly disapprove of homosexuality, you'll see a message from
OKCupid like:

 _Religion isn 't normally the business of a website. But you've expressed an
interest in dating someone whose religion denies equal rights to gay people.
Sure, this person may seem OK, and may even have their own opinions, but the
leaders of their religion spread hatred, and it pains us to send even a single
quantum of relationship happiness towards people who still affiliate with that
religion.

If you still want to date them, you can click the link below, but wouldn't you
really rather date the following matches, who we've determined from their
public and private questionnaire answers better reflect OKCupid's approved
religious and political values?_

Seriously, I would have expected a dating website to have a deeper respect for
the often-arbitrary reasons individual beliefs deviate from the norms of their
family, employer, or community.

~~~
webwright
Today, it's being anti-gay-rights is acceptable to lots of people. 50 years
ago, being a racist was acceptable to lots of people. Would you work for or
buy products from a CEO who was an unapologetic racist just because his
beliefs were a product of his family/community?

A good question to ask: If you think we will evolve to the point where gay
rights are a given, what should we do _right now_? Should we be respectful for
these often-arbitrary beliefs or should we try to make people/companies with
these beliefs uncomfortable (but in kind/respectful way)? Honest question.

~~~
sentenza
Wait. The guy is also the inventor of Javascript. Shouldn't everybody be
boycotting that? I mean it has a lot more to do with him than Firefox does.
After all, he's the CEO of Mozilla Corporation (not the Foundation), which is
only indirectly connected to Firefox, but he _invented_ Javascript!

What am I missing here?

~~~
DavidWoof
You seem sincere, so here's an honest answer.

What you're missing is the nature of the job of CEO, especially in Silicon
Valley. It's not a job where you bury your head down and get the work done, a
huge part of the job is being the public face of the company.

The Mozilla Corp. has decided that their public face should be someone who is
opposed to equal rights for gays. That's completely different than having a
racist working as a programmer or in the mail room or even as CTO.

Boycotting javascript would be silly. Nobody is trying to say that everything
Eich has touched now has cooties and we should stay away from it. However,
it's perfectly reasonable to ask what kind of company Mozilla wants to be when
they decide they want Eich as their public representative.

~~~
marshray
I wonder how many people making this "public face of the company" argument
could name the current CEO of Netflix.

~~~
gojomo
Or, before the recent controversy, name any of the prior Mozilla CEOs. (It
hasn't seemed to be an organization reliant on big-personality/high-profile
CEOs.)

------
thu
Edit: this link works for everyone (it is provided in another submission):
[http://www.okcupid.com/home?mozilla_message=1](http://www.okcupid.com/home?mozilla_message=1)

Edit 2: the Internet Exploder typo is theirs.

Here is the text (for those who don't use Firefox):

Hello there, Mozilla Firefox user. Pardon this interruption of your OkCupid
experience.

Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay
couples. We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to
access OkCupid.

Politics is normally not the business of a website, and we all know there’s a
lot more wrong with the world than misguided CEOs. So you might wonder why
we’re asserting ourselves today. This is why: we’ve devoted the last ten years
to bringing people—all people—together. If individuals like Mr. Eich had their
way, then roughly 8% of the relationships we’ve worked so hard to bring about
would be illegal. Equality for gay relationships is personally important to
many of us here at OkCupid. But it’s professionally important to the entire
company. OkCupid is for creating love. Those who seek to deny love and instead
enforce misery, shame, and frustration are our enemies, and we wish them
nothing but failure.

If you want to keep using Firefox, the link at the bottom will take you
through to the site.

However, we urge you to consider different software for accessing OkCupid:

[3 buttons:] Google Chrome Internet Exploder Opera

Thank you, OkCupid

~~~
steve19
"Mr. Eich had their way, then roughly 8% of the relationships we’ve worked so
hard to bring about would be illegal"

I don't know much about Eich, but I don't think he was working to make same-
sex relationships illegal (like Uganda or nigeria). it does okcupid no credit
to infer that he does (using weasel words like "people like Mr eich".)

saying "eich wanted to prevent 8% of our customers from enjoying the
fulfillment that marriage can bring to a relationship" would be much more
honest.

~~~
mkr-hn
Marriage is a possibility for a relationship if you're straight. To deny that
for gay people is to deny them the full legal potential of their relationship.

edit: added legal before potential

~~~
oneeyedpigeon
Please rephrase that. Whilst I entirely agree with your sentiment about
equality, your implication that those of us in a loving relationship who
choose _not_ to marry aren't realising the 'full potential of our
relationship' is pretty hurtful. It's precisely this kind of attitude that
makes me so reluctant to get married myself.

~~~
oneeyedpigeon
edit: thanks for your edit. And I'm still bitter about _that_ , but that's a
whole other argument ;)

------
Todd
Why doesn't OkCupid take a bolder stance and remove all JavaScript from their
site? Brendan invented it. I guess that wouldn't be convenient. Better to ask
users to inconvenience themselves. This really isn't fair to all of the people
who have worked so hard to make Firefox what it is today.

~~~
fennecfoxen
Why doesn't OKCupid take a bolder stance and give a button to all their users
when they sign in, asking, "Do you support marriage equality?" If they click
"no", it deletes your account.

I mean, as long as you've decided this is the sort of thing your business
ought to be concerning itself with...

~~~
oneeyedpigeon
Although that situation you outline might seem pretty extreme, spare a thought
for those who suffer far worse discrimination in real life, where it actually
matters. Cf. the bed and breakfast owner who asks "Are you gay?" and if the
answer's "yes", shuts their door on you.

~~~
fennecfoxen
I will spare a thought! However, I will request that we could consider whether
this marginalization and inconvenience is in fact effectively remedied by
seeking __systematic vengeance __upon all people who oppose government
recognition of these marriages...

~~~
oneeyedpigeon
No, fair point. Although I would like to think that a) those "seeking
systematic vengeance" (which I agree is an overreaction) are in the minority
of those raising this issue b) most people's concern isn't with the very
narrow issue of "government recognition of these marriages" but the much wider
issue of homophobic discrimination which the former is but a small part.

------
spicyj
Mozilla released a blog post on Saturday clearly stating:

> Mozilla supports equality for all, including marriage equality for LGBT
> couples.

[https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/03/29/mozilla-supports-
lg...](https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/03/29/mozilla-supports-lgbt-
equality/)

There's no evidence that Brendan Eich will bring any of his political views to
the workplace; this continued backlash feels unwarranted.

~~~
davidgerard
They released it too late.

If they had ANY clue, they'd have thought of this ahead of time. _e.g._
Brendan donates $2k or $5k to a gay charity requiring a public record (as the
Prop 8 donation did) three months ago, someone notices two months ago, he can
then stay as gnomic as he likes. Something like that. But, y’know, literally
nobody in the upper echelons of Mozilla thought of this.

That neither Eich or the board thought of this ahead of the time does,
actually, suggest they're not up to the job. This is SIMPLE STUFF.

~~~
intslack
>That neither Eich or the board thought of this ahead of the time does,
actually, suggest they're not up to the job. This is SIMPLE STUFF.

Evidence suggests that they've been spending months fighting a battle
pertaining to picking an insider as CEO, which ultimately caused three members
to resign from the Moz Co. board.

Which explains why they were so unprepared for anything else.

e: Bogus theory by Ars and WSJ, Mozilla issued a statement that the shake-up
of board members was planned well in advance amongst themselves for various
reasons.

~~~
Osmose
Two of the three resignations were planned beforehand and were not related to
the CEO choice (see the update at the bottom of
[http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/03/three-mozilla-
board-...](http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/03/three-mozilla-board-
members-including-two-former-ceos-step-down/)).

~~~
intslack
Thanks for the clarification, haven't been following this very closely and
didn't read Mozilla's statement in response (it wasn't very prompt.)

------
dang
We don't need more than one story about this on the front page, so I'm killing
the others.

Commenters: To state the obvious, this is an inflammatory topic. If you post a
comment, make sure that it is a thoughtful one.

Readers: If you see a comment that is not thoughtful, please downvote it. Most
comments in this thread so far have not been, so you have your work cut out
for you.

In extreme cases, flag the comment. To flag a comment, click on "link" to go
to the item page, then look for the "flag" link at the top. As a calibration
hint, I haven't seen any comments in this thread that deserve flagging. But I
can't read them all.

As I hope everyone knows by now, we're experimenting with ways to solve the
problem of toxic comments on Hacker News. I believe that the community has to
solve this problem, rather than us imposing a solution. Consider this our
appeal to all fair-minded readers to pitch in.

~~~
lawl
I think submitting a separate story would be better so it gets proper
attention and can be discussed without derailing this submission.

Hmm, yeah I guess I just accused the mods of derailing.

~~~
dang
I'm afraid you may have missed my point. I was deliberately intervening in
this submission, because the thread sucked. Edit: it might be a bit better
now.

All: Unthoughtful comments should be downvoted. Have at it.

Edit: I've mollified my wording slightly. Please downvote judiciously.

~~~
lawl
Sorry. I wasn't talking about this.

I was talking about the invitation to pitch in how to solve the general
problem of hateful comments. Which I think shouldn't be discussed here,
because it's not only a problem of this specific submission.

Sorry if I misunderstood this invitation.

~~~
dang
We're entering a period of experimentation where things will be in flux for a
while. For now, as one experiment, I'm adding moderation comments to specific
posts. I won't keep doing it, because it's tiring and tedious to write (and no
doubt to read). But I want to send a clear signal to the community that we're
engaged, and also address the low-handing fruit of transparency concerns, if
that makes sense.

------
honksillet
This is petulant and abrasive. Eich's personal politic's is only tangentially
related to OkCupid business and not at all related to Mozilla's business. Also
it should be obvious that Eich != Mozilla. It is very off-putting to have a
company bludgeon it's user with the personal politics of it's runners.

~~~
toomuchtodo
The takeaway is that businesses and non-profits don't operate in a vacuum, and
there are real consequences for having a bigot as the head of your operation.

I find it highly disingenuous to call supporting equal rights "petulant and
abrasive".

~~~
mkr-hn
I don't think honksillet said supporting equal rights is petulant and
abrasive.

~~~
toomuchtodo
My interpretation of what honksillet said was that OKCupid asking users not to
use Firefox is petulant and abrasive. If I am incorrect, I'll retract my
statement [honksillet: reply to me if this is the case].

OKCupid's business revolves around personal relationships. Some of those
relationships are same sex relationships. To OKC, this issue is important to
them. Let's not confuse meaningful concern with rhetoric.

How is this any different then when same sex couples boycotted businesses in
California where the owner donated to Prop 8
[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_\(2008\))]?

~~~
mkr-hn
A mode of expression can be petulant and abrasive even if the underlying
message is good. Social justice advocacy is full of abrasive and petulant
people who do a poor job of representing good causes.

edit: Can you stop with the downvotes? I'm not arguing that OKCupid's message
is petulant and abrasive. I was trying to make sense of what honksillet was
saying.

~~~
davidgerard
The tone argument turns out not to be very convincing.

~~~
mkr-hn
There's not much more frustrating than an "ally" who acts like a fool and
gives bigots something to point to, forcing me to answer for them before I can
make my own arguments.

------
cpeterso
This article's assertion that "half of Mozilla's six-person board resigned
over the Proposition 8 donation" is incorrect. If you follow the link to The
Verge's own article about the Mozilla board, that article has been amended
with Mozilla's response:

[http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/28/5559284/half-of-
mozillas-b...](http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/28/5559284/half-of-mozillas-
board-reportedly-resign-over-new-ceo-choice)

------
ignostic
I disagree with the comments saying the CEO's personal beliefs are irrelevant.
I believe OKC's message is both relevant and appropriate.

I'll grant that the "8% of relationships... would be illegal" argument is a
little weak, but the CEO IS paid by Mozilla. In the past he has donated to
anti-gay-marriage causes, and may continue to do so in the future enabled by
Mozilla's money. Firefox users help Mozilla make money. The browser is the
medium for the site and the user. The user, in accessing sites like OKC,
allows Mozilla to give some money to the CEO who in turn could give it to a
cause many see as encouraging bigotry. Websites like OKC are an essential
(even if indirect) part of Mozilla's revenue model.

Brendan Eich has a right to free speech, and so does OKCupid. We also have a
right to responsible consumerism. In a true free market, responsible
consumption helps us ensure companies are using their profits in a way we
believe is ethical.

Personally I'm glad OKC is helping to send the message that supporting
discrimination based on sexual orientation isn't acceptable to many of us in
today's society.

~~~
adamors
> but the CEO IS paid by Mozilla. In the past he has donated to anti-gay-
> marriage causes, and may continue to do so in the future enabled by
> Mozilla's money.

Going by this logic, we should be vetting every person who works at a company
whose product we use, because they may have contributed to some cause we don't
agree with.

~~~
ignostic
Yes, and I wish we could. But given the size of companies and products
available, we obviously have to do the best we can. It makes sense to start
with the company itself and its top leader.

~~~
adamors
But it's not possible. Every company is lead by scumbags, your only choice is
which scumbag's product you buy.

This entire situation reminds me of this scene from 30 Rock:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm3TepXcD8A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm3TepXcD8A)

~~~
ignostic
> _" Every company is lead by scumbags, your only choice is which scumbag's
> product you buy."_

Again, that's a really big claim that you can't possibly back up. I don't
subscribe to the cynical and defeatist attitude either. I'll do the best I can
to make the world a better and more fair place.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
What companies are you currently boycotting?

------
stephanerangaya
Here's the full text:

Hello there, Mozilla Firefox user. Pardon this interruption of your OkCupid
experience.

Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay
couples. We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to
access OkCupid.

Politics is normally not the business of a website, and we all know there’s a
lot more wrong with the world than misguided CEOs. So you might wonder why
we’re asserting ourselves today. This is why: we’ve devoted the last ten years
to bringing people—all people—together. If individuals like Mr. Eich had their
way, then roughly 8% of the relationships we’ve worked so hard to bring about
would be illegal. Equality for gay relationships is personally important to
many of us here at OkCupid. But it’s professionally important to the entire
company. OkCupid is for creating love. Those who seek to deny love and instead
enforce misery, shame, and frustration are our enemies, and we wish them
nothing but failure.

If you want to keep using Firefox, the link at the bottom will take you
through to the site.

However, we urge you to consider different software for accessing OkCupid:

Google Chrome / Internet Exploder / Opera / Safari

Thank you, OkCupid

Background on Mr. Eich and Mozilla

In 2008, Mr. Eich supported the passage of California’s Prop 8, a statewide
initiative to ban gay marriage, with a $1000 donation. Granted, his
contribution is now six years in the past, and people can change. But Mr.
Eich’s boilerplate statements in the time since make it seem like he has the
same views now as he did then. Mozilla recently promoted him to CEO, hence the
issue only now coming to our attention. His donation was known to Mozilla at
the time of his promotion, and, furthermore, CEOs are rewarded based on their
company’s performance. The CEO is the visionary for a company and its
products. We are sad to think that any OkCupid page loads would even
indirectly contribute towards the success of an individual who supported Prop
8—and who for all we know would support it again. We wish Mozilla’s
institutional commitment to freedom and openness were better reflected by
their choice of leadership.

Continue to OkCupid

------
ancarda
I really think Eich is going to have to step down at some point. The backlash
hasn't calmed down and Mozilla is going to risk losing more users over this.
At some point you have to ask if it's really worth it. Does Eich bring more
value to Mozilla that countless developers and users that are boycotting the
software?

~~~
zobzu
actually stepping down might be worse than not, at this point.

besides, people complaining about it are quite dumb: eich has been a major
player in firefox since the birth of firefox. so basically, nothing has
changed - him being ceo or not.

If anything, this is triggered by people who want to hurt firefox, in any
possible way. This includes but isn't limited to, competitors (Google Chrome,
IE, etc.), disgruntled volunteers (refused checkings, you didn't fix my bug,
etc), disgruntled employees (you don't work well you're fired, etc), people
gaining from any advertising (okcupid, news, etc)

~~~
omni
"besides, people complaining about it are quite dumb: eich has been a major
player in firefox since the birth of firefox. so basically, nothing has
changed - him being ceo or not."

Except he's CEO now. The leader of the company. The public face that the
company puts forward. The person that all the other employees are supposed to
look up to.

Other than that, nothing's changed.

~~~
agapos
Never understood this "face of company" stuff Americans are so obsessed
with... if he wouldn't have took that job, but kept working on a similarly
influential position as he did up till date, no one would be making these
"boycott Mozilla" self-advertisements, just as they didn't do anything alike
before, right? Does all this mean that people care more about someone's three
titular letters instead of his behaviour and actions in his position?

------
sveme
This actually made me remove my (dormant, but still) account on okcupid. I am
absolutely a proponent of equal rights and I absolutely disagree with Brendan
Eich's actions. Still I continue using Firefox and Thunderbird (and
Javascript) as Mozilla remains the last really influential supporter of an
open web. The efforts of the many Mozilla developers outweigh the hateful
beliefs of one Eich.

Why then remove my okcupid account? I feel pushed, I feel that they tried to
create a bad conscience, I feel emotionally manipulated. That's not how a
business should treat me.

------
lexcorvus
This from a company that lists only "female" and "male" as gender
options—fifty-four fewer than Facebook. Who's insufficiently inclusive now?

~~~
ancarda
Facebook only has male or female on the signup page and you also can only
change gender to male or female in the settings:
[http://imgur.com/OcnmwkB](http://imgur.com/OcnmwkB)

------
waterlesscloud
I look forward to a full public review of the politics of OkCupid executives
and investors. Actually, I'm sure someone is going to do exactly this now.

Now that Pandora's Box has been opened, it's not going to shut very easily.
It's going to get bloody.

------
Omni5cience
The home one only works if you're signed in.

This works for everyone
[http://www.okcupid.com/?mozilla_message=1](http://www.okcupid.com/?mozilla_message=1)

~~~
general_failure
Not anymore

~~~
davidgerard
Worked for me on Chromium just now.

------
pvnick
Eich has made it clear, both through promises as well as actions, that he is
not going to force his beliefs on Mozilla. Does OkCupid seriously wish harm
upon an organization that employs hundreds of innocent individuals, most of
whom likely hold different beliefs than Eich? An organization that works for
the open web everyday and defends our privacy against actual harmful actions
by criminal organizations? Intentionally trying to bring down Mozilla's
browser market share means they have less negotiating power with the search
engine providers that make up the majority of their revenue.

Talk about forcing your beliefs on others. OkCupid is shamelessly exploiting
this situation for attention.

~~~
ignostic
> _" Talk about forcing your beliefs on others."_

What? How does OKC's use of free speech amount to "forcing" their beliefs on
others?

> _" OkCupid is shamelessly exploiting this situation for attention."_

Care to back that up? Do you have the information necessary to say OKC is
exploiting the situation for attention? Do you know their beliefs? Their
intentions? Do you know their motivations and what they hope to accomplish? Do
you actually know _anything_ about _anyone_ involved in what OKC did? If not,
I suggest you stop making claims of fact where you are wholly ignorant of the
truth.

~~~
agapos
This is my first time hearing about OKC, and I already saw at least six
references to this act of theirs on HNews alone, until one of the mods (or
their local counterparts) deleted those.

What you make out of this information is up to you.

------
dangayle
This is ridiculous. If we started boycotting every company based on our
disagreements with their CEOs beliefs, we'd have to eventually boycott
everyone.

------
trhway
>Google Chrome Internet Exploder Opera

yep, there is no good working browser around that i can trust. Chrome is just
like the "Exploder" only from another, new generation, MS.

edit: i fully support the equal rights (among others the right to file joint
return with object of your sexual desire) and kind of surprised to learn that
a supposedly smart techie would actively support the opposite. I'm surprised
at Mozilla too - would they hire an open segregationist or a anti-women-
election-right proponent?

~~~
soperj
Chromium then?

~~~
aye
Also, surf ([http://surf.suckless.org](http://surf.suckless.org)), or Midori,
or Iceweasel, or Uzbl, or Jumanji... :)

~~~
Havvy
Iceweasel is Firefox with the branding changed. It's otherwise identical.

------
mkr-hn
Each of the non-Firefox browsers falls short of my needs in its own way.
Firefox is more than one bigot at the top. And people will be watching him
like a hawk for bad behavior, so I doubt it'll be an issue.

~~~
davidgerard
The point is it's people outside Mozilla, not just the techie insiders.

See also, from the other side of the world:
[http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/victoria/vac-gmhc-to-
boyco...](http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/victoria/vac-gmhc-to-boycott-
mozilla-13422.html) That's a significant gay charity issuing a _press release_
to say they're boycotting.

------
namuol
They might as well disable Javascript for all their users, while they're at
it.

~~~
jrs99
I would not doubt for a second that new browsers without javascript, but using
other languages, will start popping up in the future simply because of this.

~~~
justinreeves
If something is to replace Javascript, it's going to be because of the
language, not Brendan Eich.

~~~
jrs99
I disagree. I think people can replace JavaScript simply because of Brendan
Eich. I can see it happening easily.

~~~
smokinjoe
How? I'm actually really curious how it could be done easily.

~~~
jrs99
i didn't mean it would be done easily.

I meant that I could easily see it happening.

It would definitely be hard. I actually love JavaScript. But I could easily
imagine someone who has something against Brendan Eich start their own browser
without javascript. And I can imagine it becoming viral, too.

~~~
MichaelGG
The JVM, the CLR, Flash, NaCL -- all of these already exist with browser
implementations yet are having traction issues.

On top of that, it is unlikely Eich controls JS to the same level as FF, so
it'd be a mostly pointless gesture. It'd be like finding out John McCarthy was
a vile person, and abandoning all LISP-like languages.

~~~
jrs99
it's a little stronger than that, in my opinion.

I think it would be like finding out if the CEO of Microsoft didn't want
blacks to be able to get married. Would you expect blacks to continue using
Windows?

Imagine you were gay. Would you want to use Firefox and JavaScript? I'm a big
fan of JS. I'm straight and it's somewhat distasteful to me now. If I were
gay, I think that feeling would be very strong.

~~~
MichaelGG
William Shockley held some opinions a lot of people would dislike. No one is
ditching the transistor.

Darwin thought blacks were quite inferior and not as evolved. No one is
discounting the theory of evolution.

It'd be like ditching XMLHttpRequest because someone at MS was racist - it's
simply not going to happen.

~~~
jrs99
I think it would be like blacks not using Windows because the CEO of Microsoft
said that blacks should not be allowed to get married.

I believe users can boycott a product and start a movement and have a huge
effect in today's world. It's happened before and I think it's possible it can
happen again.

I think most people realize that it was socially acceptable for people to hold
certain beliefs in another era and would not fault them for holding those
beliefs.

If the car was invented by a homophobe, it's not like people would ditch it,
given that cars are essential to many people and also given the time period
the inventor lived in. But is Mozilla or javascript essential? Maybe. You
could certainly be correct that it won't happen. But I can see it being
replaced. I can see a group of people choosing alternatives.

------
agapos
Kinda adorable how people keep arguing back and forth, but fail to take notes
on how the actual Moz employees act or think on it. And most of them think he
is entitled to his beliefs and acts, and he should not be banished for it,
even if they do not agree with him.

Please, try to learn this approach, pro-gay activists.

[http://bholley.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/on-brendan-eich-
and-...](http://bholley.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/on-brendan-eich-and-the-
thought-police/)

[https://staktrace.com/spout/entry.php?id=823](https://staktrace.com/spout/entry.php?id=823)

[http://christianheilmann.com/2014/03/31/on-
hating/](http://christianheilmann.com/2014/03/31/on-hating/)

[http://www.twobraids.com/2014/03/the-mozilla-
ceo.html](http://www.twobraids.com/2014/03/the-mozilla-ceo.html)

[http://patrickfinch.com/2014/03/31/the-most-important-
decisi...](http://patrickfinch.com/2014/03/31/the-most-important-decisions-we-
make/)

[https://ozten.com/psto/2014/03/28/pick-your-
battles/](https://ozten.com/psto/2014/03/28/pick-your-battles/)

~~~
nnethercote
Also: [http://subfictional.com/2014/03/24/on-brendan-eich-as-ceo-
of...](http://subfictional.com/2014/03/24/on-brendan-eich-as-ceo-of-mozilla/)

------
hetman
Eich's reponse to the concerns:

[https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-
mozilla/](https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/)

------
wtbob
Utterly stupid. Gives me an excuse to close my OkCupid account though.

------
vise890
Am I the only one here who thinks that maybe a petition asking Mozilla to
pressure Eich to step down may be a better solution to this?

I seems that all the years of contributions and sacrifices by the community to
build a great product, fight for a better internet and all that mozilla has
stood for could be very rapidly undone if we continue portraying it as a
homophobic institution. All of this good, from so many people, undone for the
views of one man.

Say we are successful with this, Firefox goes out of the picture. Mozilla is
dead. Would that be something to aspire for? I'm creeped out by the state of
the internet as it is already, mozilla seems like the last company that truly
cares. Who would fight for keeping the internet open then? Google?

Let's direct the criticism to the man for his beliefs, lets let know mozilla
that their choice is not cool and we won't accept it. Let's not bring the
whole thing down with it please.

~~~
exodust
Even better, let's not criticise someone for their beliefs about marriage.
"Marriage" is not a person, or natural thing. If people think it should be
limited then so be it.

Legal rights on the other hand, that's another matter. The problem is that
people lump marriage and legal rights in the same boat, then don't hesitate to
unleash hell on anyone who thinks marriage should remain traditional and..
"YOU"RE ANTI-GAY"... wait, what? I just think marriage is between a man and...
"YOU'RE HOMOPHOBIC".

I'm sick of it. A lot of people are sick of hearing about gay marriage. Sure,
let's recognise civil unions and the rights there, but leave marriage out of
it.

------
mankyd
Provided link doesn't work for me. Use just
[https://www.okcupid.com/](https://www.okcupid.com/), and it must be visited
in Firefox.

------
itg
Will OKCupid also stop using javascript?

~~~
davidgerard
There is no easy swap-in replacement.

~~~
Zikes
It's good to know we can set aside our moral values when convenience is at
stake.

~~~
whyenot
The point is to make a statement and educate users. Not cut off your nose to
spite your face.

~~~
Zikes
Yes! Let's destroy a man in the name of equality and social justice! Let's
educate everyone about our high and mighty (selectively applied) morals at any
cost!

It'll be totally worth it for that sweet, sweet sense of smugness we'll feel
when we look in the mirror.

~~~
whyenot
I donated both money and time to Mozilla in the pre-Google days when they were
really struggling. I'm also gay and a resident of California. When proposition
8 passed it really hurt. Finding out that an organization I've supported now
has chosen a leader who explicitly acted to take away my rights, that really
hurts too. It's a betrayal. I would hope that you can understand why or at
least have the empathy not to belittle those who _do_ feel strongly about it.

------
tasty_freeze
Let's pick a different hot button issue. Say Eich contributed to a pro or anti
gun control measure. Hell, as far as I know, he has.

How many of you, who are as intensely interested in gun control/rights as
people are over gay/anti-gay marriage rights, would be demanding that he step
down? And if you say you would, there are hundreds of corporations actually in
that position (either for or against) with whom you are probably doing
business.

~~~
MichaelGG
Reducing it to a "hot button issue" is invalid. As far as human rights goes,
there's no rational way to arrive at same-sex marriages not being allowed, if
heterosex marriages are.

Whereas in the US, gun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, so even if
gun ownership was a major net negative, it'd still be an issue.

Just like in some countries, complete bank secrecy is a constitutional issue,
so even giving the local IRS-equivalent, while demonstrably a net positive for
society, becomes a "hot button" issue.

Probably the closest modern issue is being against euthanasia/suicide. It's
obviously cruel to force people to suffer, and _safety issues_ aside, it's
obvious someone should be able to terminate their life in face of
insurmountable suffering. Yet people will object to that on all sorts of
grounds.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
> _there 's no rational way to arrive at same-sex marriages not being allowed,
> if heterosex marriages are_ //

There are plenty of rational ways to do that. I'm guessing you'd primarily
disagree with the axioms on which they're founded.

How about "state recognition of marriage is primarily about supporting the
family unit as the nucleus of society - as same-sex union can't create
children, long-term partnerships engendering opposite-sex union are to be
promoted in order create a general impetus towards stable home environments
for child rearing and raising". That seems rational; disregarding verity do
you disagree it's rational?

If you argue against this definition then to my mind you come to define a new
relationship, let's call it civil-union. In civil-union there seems no logical
reason to exclude same-family, or multiple-person unions. _I_ can't see how
you can say "the definition of marriage as the union of a man and woman
[who're not closely related]" is wrong because it limits marriage to a
particular historical/tradition form and then come up with a new definition to
foist on people that excludes groups (families, polyamorous, etc.) for
arbitrary reasons that don't even have the support of history or tradition [or
theology].

> _Probably the closest modern issue is_ [...] //

So are you saying if a CEO of a company believed euthanasia to be wrong you'd
stop using that companies products?

~~~
Borogove
There is no requirement that legal marriage between a man and a woman involve
child-raising. There is no requirement that legal marriage between a man and a
woman involve love or sex.

If Albert, Barbara, and Charles go to San Francisco City Hall in 2008, and
Albert says "I want to marry Charles", he's told no. If he says "I want to
marry Barbara", he's told yes. The state knows nothing about their sex life or
feelings about children. What is the rationale?

~~~
waterlesscloud
Lack of sexual interaction (consummation) can in fact play a role in having a
marriage recognized, or annulled. It's been a factor in "green card"
marriages, for example.

For another example, inability of consummate a marriage is grounds for
annulment in some states.

[http://www.colorado-family-law.com/termination-
marriage/annu...](http://www.colorado-family-law.com/termination-
marriage/annulment-grounds.htm)

~~~
Borogove
Annulment for non-consummation is initiated by a spouse, not by the state.

I've been married twice in CA and on neither occasion was I asked about my sex
life or child-raising plans.

------
smithzvk
I guess my question is, does using Firefox mean that you support Mozilla, much
less the opinions of Mozilla's CEO? If I switch to IceWeasel, do I still
support it? Is using Gecko the sin here? When did I sign on for supporting
these beliefs. My wife and I don't eat at Chik-fil-a anymore due to their
beliefs, but the financial support is clear there. Here I pick and chose from
the things that Mozilla creates that I endorse and I never installed the bigot
extension on Firefox.

This person probably deserves the ridicule, maybe he needs to step down, maybe
we should all switch to IceWeasel to really show them (by the way, that would
be a much more positive route to take as opposed to putting all our eggs in
the webkit basket), but one of the nice things about Free Software is that you
can have a reprehensible person in charge of it and there is something that
you can do about it besides simply not using it.

I guess that is why this statement feels weird. It seems akin to finding out
that the inventor of the hammer, all those millennia ago, had slaves, so you
decide that from now on you are going to use screws and that you will try to
get other people to turn their backs on hammers as well.

------
exodust
This is a major bullshit move by okcupid.

I've cancelled my account with them and sent them feedback explaining why it's
NOT ok to urge people not to use certain free, open source software.

It's not the "web browser's" fault that somebody at Mozilla has a different
opinion about gay marriage than somebody at okcupid.

And on the subject of marriage, people need to remember that "marriage" is
man-made, there is no absolute right to an artificial made-up tradition.

The focus and fight should be about legal equality, and recognition of same-
sex couples for things like superannuation, health, taxation, and other areas
where married couples have benefits and laws based on their married status.

You might argue that "marriage" is the sum of all those laws and rights, plus
love, but it's not. Marriage is not the sum of anything, it's just marriage,
and if people think it should remain a traditional man woman, bride groom
thing, then that is a completely justified argument.

Fight for equality, not for entry into the "marriage club".

I'm not married and don't care either way, but those who do shouldn't be
waging war against internet browsers.

------
kfcm
Clicked on link and got this:

    
    
      OkCupid needs JavaScript to function, but you have it disabled. Check your browser settings.

------
Osiris
Are people suggesting that holding a personal opinion that is contrary to
another person's opinion disqualifies that person from having a job?

I haven't seen any suggestions that he has attempted to discriminate, or
implement discriminatory policies, against any individuals at Mozilla or
otherwise.

I voted for Amendment 64 in Colorado to legalize canabis. Should that
disqualify me from working because maybe means I get high too much (though I
don't use)?

The argument against him is that he's discriminating, but now we have a case
where OkCupid is literally and actively discriminating against users based on
their choice of browser. Other people have actively threatened him. Those
actions are, from my perspective, completely hypocritical: "We don't like
people that discriminate, so we're going to discriminate against people that
we don't agree with."

~~~
Borogove
For the record, you can still use OKC with Firefox; you just get a lecture
when you do it.

Is it okay to discriminate against Nazis, or is that hypocritical?

~~~
Osiris
That depends. Have they actually killed people or just talked about it?

~~~
Borogove
Seriously? That's your dividing line?

Incidentally, you mentioned threats to Eich above; I haven't personally seen
any but I don't support threats of violence to him. I don't even have
particularly strong feelings one way or the other about boycotting Mozilla.
Mostly we're having a conversation here.

I do feel it's perfectly reasonable to point fingers of shame towards Eich for
his donations and weaseling, and at Mozilla for elevating Eich.

------
s0me0ne
How is Mozilla responsible for this? This guy wasn't even CEO when he made the
donation in 2008 (as far as I know). So to abandon Firefox which is not his
creation alone seems foolish. If anything abandoning JavaScript would make
more sense since that is what he created, not Mozilla or Firefox.

------
Glyptodon
I wonder if Firefox users are more likely to use adblock.

------
Zikes
We'll forgive Fred Phelps, but apparently the hate for Javascript just runs
too deep.

~~~
davidgerard
Fortunately, we have an answer for that:
[http://newstechnica.com/2014/03/27/mozilla-announces-
javascr...](http://newstechnica.com/2014/03/27/mozilla-announces-javascript-
for-heterosexuals/) It solves the equality operator problem by not having any.

------
pubman
I find it interesting that match.com which owns okcupid works fine in firefox.
So it seems they are making a statement with the smaller site that wont cost
them nearly as much in traffic. I could be wrong but that is my 5sec
observation.

------
jebblue
Linus Torvalds describes himself as an atheist. I advocate as hard today for
Linux as I did 20 years ago. I do not let Linus's personal beliefs impact the
decision on what software I run. It should not impact yours.

~~~
Borogove
What legal rights has Linus Torvalds tried to take away from minorities?

------
jebblue
Eric Schmidt is a progressive. I did not boycott Google's products, what he
did or didn't believe personally did not and does not impact the decisions I
make on what software I run. It should not impact yours.

------
igl
Javascript and now this!

Why shouldn't you say something? Religion enjoys way too much freedom. A lot
of people here give these discriminators a free pass for no rational reason.
Horrible.

------
septerr
When I read the title of this post, I first thought 'Oh okCupid's website
breaks in FF and instead of fixing the site, they are asking their users to
switch to another browser'. Then the comments here completely threw me off.
Took some digging to figure out what the real issue was.

The okcupid link in the title (at least on mobile) just goes to their login
page, no message about ditching FF there.

~~~
tempestn
Can you save others that digging by _saying_ what the real issue was?

Edit: Here, this explains it: [http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/31/okcupid-
offers-firefox-visi...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/31/okcupid-offers-
firefox-visitors-links-to-alternate-browsers-to-protest-new-mozilla-ceo/)

------
cjfont
Is this not a slap in the face of everyone else who has contributed to the
Mozilla Foundation that is not in any way associated with Eich or his views?
Seems that for some, a response of some kind is needed regardless of how
irrational it may be.

------
kephra
Dear Gays, we hate Mozilla, so please use a browser that spies on you like
Google Chrome, or deinstall your Linux and switch to Windows Explorer, or
install a browser that has problems with 80% of the other webpages.

~~~
slurry
I think it's a shame that this comment has been downvoted to hell, because
it's actually quite illuminating: the satire in it, such as it is, revolves
around the assumption that FOSS politics is equal to or greater in urgency
than any other kind of politics. Human rights violation? GPL violation! Same
category.

The reason I think it's so valuable is that a version of it probably informed
the board's decision to appoint Eich despite the already controversial Prop 8
donation. "Sure, there's this $1000 he gave and that's terrible, but look at
all the great FOSS code he's contributed! The controversy can't last long,
we're Mozilla, we're the good guys. Everybody knows that."

Lots of people out there do not think like this.

Lots of people care about social justice and see no problem using IE.

~~~
anonbanker
Apparently, the people that care about social justice give zero care toward
security or the four essential freedoms of software.

------
Justsignedup
Isn't the whole point of america that PEOPLE DISAGREE? If you have an opinion,
you are entitled to it. Your personal feelings on gay marriage should not mean
that you are to be barred from getting a job where gay people also work. If,
however, you go on record as the CEO of a company saying the company does not
support gay marriage, then this is a different discussion.

So basically he is being ostracized all over for having an opinion. This is
mob rule. I like it not.

~~~
albedoa
You are entitled to an opinion. You are not entitled to protection from the
consequences of _acting_ on that opinion.

This is not an issue of "personal feelings".

------
Fakeyfakerson
To those of you that support this, did any of you boycott Obama pre-2012
because he was against gay marriage?

------
azth
Let's drag down the internet experience based on what a single person did.
What retards.

------
qq66
Someone should inform OKCupid of William Shockley's views on eugenics.

------
diydsp
OK, so are they going to make a shitstorm out of this single issue, or apply
principles equally?

IOW: Are we (they) going to dig up ALL of the CEOs of all the products they
use and find out who else donated money to anti-gay-marriage organizations and
boycott all of them?

Here's a partial list:

[http://www.phillymag.com/news/2012/08/01/boycott-chick-
fil-a...](http://www.phillymag.com/news/2012/08/01/boycott-chick-fil-a-more-
companies/)

~~~
stormbrew
No one should ever do anything for social justice reasons unless they solve
_every problem in the history of mankind_ as well!

~~~
davidgerard
[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as)
remains a perennial bad argument.

------
stevekinney
I would be more impressed if they boycotted JavaScript.

------
mavdi
This has just reached a new level of silliness.

------
sssbc
Hmm, maybe Firefox should blacklist OKcupid. Turnabout is fair...

~~~
arjie
In the browser? It'll be suicide. It doesn't matter what else a browser does.
If it blacklists sites for political reasons, users will flee.

------
zobzu
oh look , at okcupid we just found out a way to use the current news as
advertising!

i think such stuff despises more than eich's support for prop 8.

~~~
eropple
You have a history of general reprehensibility on this site, so I probably
shouldn't bother to give you the attention you crave. Because we all know that
your beef isn't with them doing this, but with people _not tolerating hatred
of gays_. And women, but, you know, one at a time.

That said, I want to stand up for a couple of my friends who work at OKCupid.
They're excellent people and I don't believe the culture at OKC would be okay
with using this as a vector for advertising. I'm confident they believe what
they're saying and I wish more companies would take a stand against the bigots
you like.

~~~
zobzu
history wah? half my friends are gay. Many are women. One is my best friend.

I think that using the excuse of being a minority to enforce ridicule
arguments is stupid - that's different.

Accusing people at random seems just as wrong.

\--

In fact, this is an interesting point. I noticed that any "negative" comment
towards reactions to this story generates very strong reactions from some
people (including death messages). This doesn't happen with other topics.

What makes you entitled to think this is ok? (this is an honest question)

