

 Building a Global, Diverse, Inclusive Mozilla Project: Addressing Controversy - fabrice_d
https://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2014/03/26/building-a-global-diverse-inclusive-mozilla-project-addressing-controversy/

======
nnethercote
Mitchell and Brendan have always been the heart and soul of Mozilla's
leadership. While Brendan's appointment as CEO might result in some changes in
where Mozilla directs its efforts, it won't cause changes in the culture; that
will remain as open and inclusive as it has always been.

Also, everyone who has an opinion on this topic should read what Christie
Koehler -- someone who most definitely has skin in this game -- wrote about
Brendan's appointment: [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/)

------
merrua
It's not really a good sign to pick someone who does not understand equality
for the board. I mean, how is that going to turn off contributors. Does he
even speak anything other than english?

------
asdfologist
One thing in common among many HN comments on this issue is the sentiment that
we shouldn't care about a CEO's political views. Perhaps this argument would
be somewhat convincing if his actions affected exclusively people outside the
company, but keep in mind that he contributed $1000 to a cause that directly
removes marriage rights of a large portion of society, some of whom are his
very own employees that he's about to lead.

For those of you who insist that all this is "just politics", would you say
the same if he contributed $1000 to a campaign to bring back slavery? What
about a campaign to remove women's voting rights? One thing for sure - the
degree of uproar would be drastically higher in those cases, and that's
precisely the problem.

------
gkoberger
Site is intermittently down:

\----------

Monday’s announcement of Brendan Eich as the new CEO of Mozilla brought a lot
of reactions. Many people were excited about what this meant for Mozilla, and
our emphasis on protecting the open Web. In the next few days we’ll see more
from Brendan and the leadership team on the opportunities in front of us.
Before that, however, both Brendan and I want to address a particular concern
that has been raised about Mozilla’s commitment to inclusiveness for LGBT
individuals and community, and whether Brendan’s role as CEO might diminish
this commitment at Mozilla.

The short answer: Mozilla’s commitment to inclusiveness for our LGBT
community, and for all underrepresented groups, will not change. Acting for or
on behalf of Mozilla, it is unacceptable to limit opportunity for _anyone_
based on the nature of sexual orientation and/or gender identity. This is not
only a commitment, it is our identity.

This commitment is a key requirement for all leadership within Mozilla,
including for the CEO, and Brendan shares this commitment as the new Chief
Executive Officer.

Second, I’ll point to Brendan’s comments [1] on this topic.

Third, I’ll note that two years ago we had an open conversation and co-
creation process about how we make sure our community supports all members,
including all forms of gender and sexual orientation. The process, with me as
the draftsperson, resulted in the Community Participation Guidelines [2].
These Guidelines mandate that (1) each of us must be inclusive of all
community members, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity and more,
and (2) any exclusionary approach you might practice elsewhere must be left at
the door, and not be brought into Mozilla’s spaces.

We expect everyone, regardless of role or title, to be committed to the
breadth of inclusiveness described in the Guidelines. These Guidelines are in
addition to our inclusive and non-discriminatory policies which apply
particularly to employees. As a practical, concrete example we’ve also been
pushing the boundaries to offer excellent health benefits across the board, to
domestic partners and all married couples, same-sex and otherwise.

My experience is that Brendan is as committed to opportunity and diversity
inside Mozilla as anyone, and more so than many. This commitment to
opportunity for all within Mozilla has been a key foundation of our work for
many years. I see it in action regularly.

The CEO role is obviously a key role, with a large amount of authority. The
CEO must have a commitment to the inclusive nature of Mozilla. This includes
of course a commitment to the Community Participation Guidelines, inclusive HR
practices and the spirit that underlies them. Brendan has made this
commitment.

Finally, I’ve been asked a few times about my own personal views, and so I’ll
add a short comment.

I am an avid supporter of equal rights for all. I support equal rights for the
LGBT community, I support equal rights for underrepresented groups, and I have
some pretty radical views about the role of underrepresented groups in social
institutions. I was surprised in 2012 to learn that Brendan and I aren’t in
close alignment here, since I’ve never seen any indication of anything other
than inclusiveness in our work together.

I spend most of my time focused on building an open Internet, which I think is
a required infrastructure for empowerment for everyone and where I think I can
add something that’s tricky to replace. If I weren’t doing this, I’d probably
be spending a good chunk of my life focused more directly on equality issues.

[1] [https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-
mozilla/](https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/) [2]
[http://www.mozilla.org/en-
US/about/governance/policies/parti...](http://www.mozilla.org/en-
US/about/governance/policies/participation/)

------
joeframbach
Could someone explain why this needed to be said? Is there some controversy
that I'm unaware of?

~~~
bsder
Because the Mozilla Foundation board underestimated the amount of flak they
were going to get for appointing someone who is anti-LGBT as their CEO.

This is inflamed by the fact that Eich has refused to apologize for this.
Therefore, everyone is making the, quite justified, assumption that he
believes in his anti-LGBT positions quite strongly.

~~~
davidgerard
The amazing thing about this whole kerfuffle is that, apparently, LITERALLY
NO-ONE AT MOZILLA realised that this would be THE STORY. They appointed
Brendan Eich CEO and LITERALLY DIDN'T ACCOUNT FOR THIS IN ANY WAY.

If they had the slightest awareness of their environment, they would have
started the softening-up PR months ago, when he started moving toward the CEO
role. They could have had everything nicely calm. But no ...

------
natrius
I don't think anyone's really worried that Mozilla is going to stop being
inclusive. They want to punish Brendan Eich for opposing marriage equality.
Saying that Mozilla won't change isn't going to change people's minds.

Personally, I don't see much of a gain to be had here. If it were a for-profit
company, I'd probably boycott them, not because it helps the cause of marriage
equality at all, but because punishing people who are jerks feels good. But
it's Mozilla, an organization whose goals I support. I don't care if it's led
by a jerk. Punishing him doesn't make the world a better place at all.

~~~
victorhooi
The below isn't necessarily targeted at the parent post, but just at anybody
who's resorting to name-calling, or claiming only their viewpoint is correct.

<rant>

You claim that "punishing jerks feels good".

I'm sorry, but this just comes across as silly internet power-tripping.

And who are you to claim somebody is a "jerk".

Brendan Eichs has personal beliefs, which I presume you don't agree with.

Whoop-de-do. Somebody is on the internet who you don't agree with. Cry me a
river.

In the olden days, gentleman would simply say, we agree to disagree, and leave
it at that.

Now, in this age of entitlement, every little boy in his mum's basement just
_has_ to get everybody to agree with him, because other peopel ARE WRONG
(according to me).

You're free to write blog posts saying you disagree with him.

Or if you think he's wrong, you can even talk to him directly - in fact, he
made a offer that he's happy to speak to anybody in private about it.

If anything, he comes across as the bigger person.

However, to go around saying, "BRENDAN IS A JERK" \- sure, you're "free" to do
it - free speech and all, but seriously, it comes across as immature and
childish...

</rant>

However, I agree with the rest of your post - Mozilla does good work. I don't
use their browser, but they do a lot for the open-source movement.

~~~
HeyImAlex
These are areas of grey; on one end you probably _would_ say that a white
supremacist campaigning for the reinstatement of slavery is kind of a jerk,
and on the other you probably wouldn't bat an eye if a guy told you he prefers
orange juice to apple. There is no magic in the word "opinion" that gives
immunity to criticism. It _is_ then up to us to define where that line lies.

~~~
victorhooi
Well, to be honest, I wouldn't call a white supremacist a "jerk".

And racism is most definitely _not_ equitable to arguing over what's a
marriage, and what's not.

If this imaginary white supremacist was just some weirdo who genuinely thinks
white people are superior, I would probably just label him a strange, somewhat
deluded man - I wouldn't hate him though.

However, I probably wouldn't invite him over for dinner, either.

If, on the other hand, he was going around calling for lynching blacks, that's
an entirely different matter - that's illegal (hate crimes).

Brandon Eichs hasn't expressed any homophobia, or that he "hates" gays, which
is what people seem to be trying to drum up publicity for.

He simply has, in his private time, given him support for maintaining the
status quo on marriage. You might disagree with that, and think that marriage
should be redefined, and that's your right (just as it's his right).

But if you descend to the level of name-calling, and saying "Your view is
like, so wrong! I'm right!", then we've already lost.

