are at it again: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536 No matter how good someone may be at their job it seems that if they have personal opinions the PC mob will seemingly lynch them.

are at it again: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536 No matter how good someone may be at their job it seems that if they have personal opinions the PC mob will seemingly lynch them.

Mitchell Baker,did she actually say that? The absolute tosh that some people come out with makes the mind boggle.

Dally wrote:are at it again: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536 No matter how good someone may be at their job it seems that if they have personal opinions the PC mob will seemingly lynch them. You have to be quite high up the scale of dumbfookery if, as a potential CEO of a huge corporation or publically listed company you then take a controversial stance on any issue, sexual or religious prejudices are always going to cause you problems when you mix in any sort of social context. Trying to fob things off as "Its just my personal opinion" just won't wash in the context of the size of company he was head of and he should have known that - the fact that he didn't or didn't care makes him unsuitable for the job in the first place.

Dally wrote:are at it again: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536 No matter how good someone may be at their job it seems that if they have personal opinions the PC mob will seemingly lynch them. You have to be quite high up the scale of dumbfookery if, as a potential CEO of a huge corporation or publically listed company you then take a controversial stance on any issue, sexual or religious prejudices are always going to cause you problems when you mix in any sort of social context. Trying to fob things off as "Its just my personal opinion" just won't wash in the context of the size of company he was head of and he should have known that - the fact that he didn't or didn't care makes him unsuitable for the job in the first place.

He was going to be fired anyway. It's terrible now, it used to be fast but now it's ridiculously unstable.

Dally wrote:are at it again: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536 No matter how good someone may be at their job it seems that if they have personal opinions the PC mob will seemingly lynch them. So being "good at your job" means you get a free card to be a complete bigoted arsehole? Mind you, I can see why you'd back the bloke

Dally wrote:are at it again: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536 No matter how good someone may be at their job it seems that if they have personal opinions the PC mob will seemingly lynch them. So being "good at your job" means you get a free card to be a complete bigoted arsehole? Mind you, I can see why you'd back the bloke

Yes, every CEO or innovator really needs to be whiter than white in every aspect, just like all our politicians are.

Let those witches burn.

He made a $1,000 donation to a campaign group 6 years ago. I suppose you think he should be prosecuted for a hate crime over it too?

They do, or they need to keep their opinions to themselves, which is difficult because you tend to find (and I've met many in the past thirty years) that leaders of industry, self-made business leaders and senior management often have a very high opinion of themselves and their opinions and seem keen to expound them to anyone within earshot, whether requested or not.

As for politicians, I learned a long time ago what sort of personality is attracted to that lifestyle, and its got worse since then.

If this guy fired a good quality employee simply because he was gay then he'd deserve to lose his job. If he was involved in gay bashing when he was younger he'd deserve hounding out of a job.

But hounding him out of a job simply for making a donation to a cause he believes in is simply reverse gay-bashing. We don't know what his opinions are over gay marriage, we don't know why he donated the money, we simply know that he made a donation.

In the past gay people were hounded for their sexuality. That was wrong, and it is wrong. But it is just as wrong to hound someone simply for having a belief that gay marriage is wrong. Now I think his opinions on gay marriage are probably wrong, but pretty much everyone has plenty of wrong opinions on plenty of issues. But hounding him over this is pretty much bordering on having thought police.

I personally don't care whether gays are allowed to marry or not. I don't value marriage that highly anyway. If gay people want to ruin their lives by getting married then they can go ahead, I really don't care. But I also think that this guy should be allowed to have the opinion that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed. He shouldn't be hounded out of a job for that reason.

He wasn't hounded out of a job. He resigned. The penny dropped that his views were simply untenable for the CEO of an organisation which very clearly sets out its fundamental commitment to equality of rights. His attempted "swerve", written as the penny was clearly starting to drop, even if he hadn't quite realised it yet, shows to any fair minded person why he could not continue in his role. After he had published that, he must have re-read it and thought nah... that so doesn't fit: Quote:I am committed to ensuring that Mozilla is, and will remain, a place that includes and supports everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, Yes but you're not, though. It had also emerged that Eich had made campaign contributions in past years to fringe Republican candidates such as that nice chap, Pat Buchanan, who once said about AIDS: Quote: “our promiscuous homosexuals appear literally hell-bent on Satanism and suicide”. Another Buchanan gem: Quote:“homosexuals have declared war on nature, and now nature is exacting an awful retribution”. The problem isn't so much him supporting people with those kind of views, repulsive though I find them, it is him being the leader of an organisation whose stated and very public ethos is totally incompatible.

He wasn't hounded out of a job. He resigned. The penny dropped that his views were simply untenable for the CEO of an organisation which very clearly sets out its fundamental commitment to equality of rights. His attempted "swerve", written as the penny was clearly starting to drop, even if he hadn't quite realised it yet, shows to any fair minded person why he could not continue in his role. After he had published that, he must have re-read it and thought nah... that so doesn't fit: Quote:I am committed to ensuring that Mozilla is, and will remain, a place that includes and supports everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, Yes but you're not, though. It had also emerged that Eich had made campaign contributions in past years to fringe Republican candidates such as that nice chap, Pat Buchanan, who once said about AIDS: Quote: “our promiscuous homosexuals appear literally hell-bent on Satanism and suicide”. Another Buchanan gem: Quote:“homosexuals have declared war on nature, and now nature is exacting an awful retribution”. The problem isn't so much him supporting people with those kind of views, repulsive though I find them, it is him being the leader of an organisation whose stated and very public ethos is totally incompatible.