Honestly he's never made any impassioned rants on the subject, never spoken out against gay marriage, never reportedly acted out against any homosexuals in any way. He only made one small donation to what was, at the time, a very popular political campaign.
Maybe he was misguided, or misunderstood the reality of what Proposition 8 would mean. The campaigns were certainly filled with misinformation that suckered in a huge number of Californians. I know we technophiles like to think we're cut from a better cloth than that, but there are days we're just as gullible as the next.
We're all guilty of lapses of morality at some point in our lives. Hopefully we learn from those mistakes. Hopefully Brendan will, as well.
* Eich to be stabbed with a pitchfork
* His family to be threatened
* Protests outside his home
* Harassing phone calls
* A Firefox boycott
* His termination
* His demotion
What the HN comments are doing:
* Quietly acknowledging that the donation happened
I think it's a far cry from a witch hunt.
✔ A Mozilla boycott
✔ His termination
✔ His demotion
> * Quietly acknowledging that the donation happened
With all due respect, this is not an accurate summary. What many comments including the original comment have been doing is seriously broaching the idea that an anti-Prop. 8 vote is a serious grounds to disqualify someone from being Mozilla CEO. Sometimes a bit coyly, in a "nice car, shame if something happened to it" manner, but that's immaterial.
Wrt to Eich and his donation, I'm on a the fence about it. I don't like mobbing on people, especially on the Internet. Especially when the people concerned have not made their reasons public. On the other hand, upon reading Proposition 8, it's difficult to imagine many other reasons than deep conservatism or homophobia for supporting it.
Ah well. I suppose Brendan will trend very carefully, and he certainly has enough technical credibility that nobody will attack him from this angle. I'll also note that a number of figures popular on HN are more well-known for their amount of wealth than their moral character. Maybe one of his crimes is not being rich enough?
How could this possibly ever happen? You'd seriously have to be a complete moron. Here's the complete text:
Section I. Title
This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act."
Section 2. Article I. Section 7.5 is added to the California Constitution, to read:
Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
Pretty fucking simple.