Mozilla CEO resigns after donation to Prop 8

[Timshel]

Personally, I am not very supportive of forcing anyone to disclose their contributions. But he is smart enough to know that that information would be available to the public.

The consumers and employees have every right in the world to object to his hiring. Several board members resigned when he was hired. How many gay people want to work for or with a guy that gives them some bullshit line that they don't have anything against homosexuals they just think they should not have equal rights and protections under the law?

What is ironic is that this is a fine example of the libertarian (sometimes conservative) argument that the market punishes bigotry and discrimination. His ability to do the job is damaged by his position which makes it more difficult for them to attract the top talent they desperately need. I don't see any reason to believe he did not see this and decide to step down himself.

 

[Timshel]

So you think he just took the job and 11 days later said 'nah, I don't really want this'??? You think he quit on his own?

There are two options moron... he was forced out or he quit on his own. Only a complete fucking idiot would be incapable of figuring out which occurred here.

It is good to see that you are proving again what a fake libertarian you are. He has the right to free speech. He has the right to support whatever he wishes. If he didn't try and incorporate his beliefs into the business, then this should not be an issue. But you think he must conform his beliefs to what the majority want him to believe.

Fuck you, idiot. You said he resigned.

re·sign riˈzīn/
verb

• 1.
  voluntarily leave a job or other position.

This position is absolutely libertarian. The market rejected him and his bigoted views.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Personally, I am not very supportive of forcing anyone to disclose their contributions. But he is smart enough to know that that information would be available to the public.

The consumers and employees have every right in the world to object to his hiring. Several board members resigned when he was hired. How many gay people want to work for or with a guy that gives them some bullshit line that they don't have anything against homosexuals they just think they should not have equal rights and protections under the law?

What is ironic is that this is a fine example of the libertarian (sometimes conservative) argument that the market punishes bigotry and discrimination. His ability to do the job is damaged by his position which makes it more difficult for them to attract the top talent they desperately need. I don't see any reason to believe he did not see this and decide to step down himself.

LMAO... ok String.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Fuck you, idiot. You said he resigned.

re·sign riˈzīn/
verb

• 1.
  voluntarily leave a job or other position.

This position is absolutely libertarian. The market rejected him and his bigoted views.

LMAO... you have never heard of a forced resignation? You fucking moron.

Your position is NOT libertarian. You are saying that if he doesn't conform to what everyone else wants him to think/believe, that it is ok to run him out of the business. His personal beliefs are just that... personal. He is entitled to them. You are not promoting Libertarian values, you are promoting group think... just the opposite.

If someone that supports planned parenthood was in the same situation... what would you say?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Holy fuck, this guy is a computing god, he was instrumental in getting the Mozilla Foundation up and running, along with Firefox and he invented Javascript. It's pretty sickening that a bunch of talentless twats whose whole raison d'etre is to be professional offence takers have forced him out.

 

[Timshel]

LMAO... you have never heard of a forced resignation? You fucking moron.

Your position is NOT libertarian. You are saying that if he doesn't conform to what everyone else wants him to think/believe, that it is ok to run him out of the business. His personal beliefs are just that... personal. He is entitled to them. You are not promoting Libertarian values, you are promoting group think... just the opposite.

If someone that supports planned parenthood was in the same situation... what would you say?

You don't yet have any proof that it was forced.

My position is absolutely libertarian. You don't know a fucking thing about the topic. Like grind, you are an unenlightened butt licker for the aristocracy and little more. This is a free market reaction to his controversial views. His position makes it more difficult for him to work with others. Many board members resigned (does that mean they were forced to???). Several of their employees were upset and it would have made it far more difficult for them to compete for top talent. Their employees are not pimple faced teenagers that can be easily replaced. They are in a desperate battle for top talent and their culture is a key selling point to that talent.

What is your solution here? Do you want the government to silence the consumers and employees that were critical of his promotion to CEO?

 

[Timshel]

LMAO... you have never heard of a forced resignation? You fucking moron.

Your position is NOT libertarian. You are saying that if he doesn't conform to what everyone else wants him to think/believe, that it is ok to run him out of the business. His personal beliefs are just that... personal. He is entitled to them. You are not promoting Libertarian values, you are promoting group think... just the opposite.

If someone that supports planned parenthood was in the same situation... what would you say?

Again, one can be fired in 29 states for being gay. What are you doing about it? Nothing. Instead you are whining about some guy that quit because of outrage over his bigoted conservative views and is probably leaving with compensation. The only principle you are upholding is partisanship.

 

[zappasguitar]

There you go. I figured. The huffpo had a link to a public database where you could look up someone and see how much they donated and to whom during one of the elections, that's why I figured it had to be public information. The right wing always gins up their persecution complex.

Waitaminute...what?

What are you saying?

That ILA/TD was just making up total nonsense once again?

It's...it's...it's just so UNLIKE him!

 

[zappasguitar]

So you think he just took the job and 11 days later said 'nah, I don't really want this'??? You think he quit on his own?

There are two options moron... he was forced out or he quit on his own. Only a complete fucking idiot would be incapable of figuring out which occurred here.

It is good to see that you are proving again what a fake libertarian you are. He has the right to free speech. He has the right to support whatever he wishes. If he didn't try and incorporate his beliefs into the business, then this should not be an issue. But you think he must conform his beliefs to what the majority want him to believe.

Apparently SF only believes "word have consequences" when it's a LIBERAL being lambasted for what he/she said.

Conservative CEO's should just be ignored.

 

[cawacko]

So you think he just took the job and 11 days later said 'nah, I don't really want this'??? You think he quit on his own?

There are two options moron... he was forced out or he quit on his own. Only a complete fucking idiot would be incapable of figuring out which occurred here.

It is good to see that you are proving again what a fake libertarian you are. He has the right to free speech. He has the right to support whatever he wishes. If he didn't try and incorporate his beliefs into the business, then this should not be an issue. But you think he must conform his beliefs to what the majority want him to believe.

Ironically many liberals think libertarians are just bigoted and racist white men. I don't imagine String would have the same response if a CEO donated money to a Libertarian candidate and was forced out.

 

[Teflon Don]

Holy fuck, this guy is a computing god, he was instrumental in getting the Mozilla Foundation up and running, along with Firefox and he invented Javascript. It's pretty sickening that a bunch of talentless twats whose whole raison d'etre is to be professional offence takers have forced him out.

Don't worry. Cawacko has this covered. He will get his bar buddies to march on Mozilla or something. Or maybe he will just sit on the bar stool and swig another beer.

I hope the lefties don't get too mad at him for this thread. He is really out on a ledge

 

[Timshel]

Ironically many liberals think libertarians are just bigoted and racist white men. I don't imagine String would have the same response if a CEO donated money to a Libertarian candidate and was forced out.

Well, when fake libertarians and pretend supporters of free market principles argue that it implies a homosexual can be fired but demand "tolerance" when some rich white homophobe resigns is there any wonder why?

You are still embellishing. We don't have any proof he was forced out.

I can't imagine that scenario. It's a bad analogy. Libertarians support many different things, many of them quite controversial, but it's not a single issue like gay marriage. If you donate to a libertarian candidate maybe it's because you are pro 2nd amendment, pro immigration (since REAL libertarians are) or you support gay marriage. No one would really have much idea why. I doubt it would cause much outcry. If one donated to the kkk or a Nazi party I am sure it would cause some problems for you as the CEO of a major company. A lower level employee might get away with that, but a CEO is the face of the company. I don't see how there is much way to avoid a negative response to that information being public. But again, I don't think we should be forced to disclose such information publicly.

I don't get what you guys are whining about or what it is you are suggesting as a solution. Either you are suggesting his critics be silenced or you are just a bunch of tools falling for the culture war nonsense about the vague and ill defined "liberal."

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You don't yet have any proof that it was forced.

LMAO... you are such a retard. It can only be forced or voluntary. Those are the only two options. Trying using a little common sense you moron.

My position is absolutely libertarian. You don't know a fucking thing about the topic. Like grind, you are an unenlightened butt licker for the aristocracy and little more. This is a free market reaction to his controversial views. His position makes it more difficult for him to work with others. Many board members resigned (does that mean they were forced to???). Several of their employees were upset and it would have made it far more difficult for them to compete for top talent. Their employees are not pimple faced teenagers that can be easily replaced. They are in a desperate battle for top talent and their culture is a key selling point to that talent.

No, it is not libertarian. It is group think. You are saying that others would find it hard to work with him because they don't agree with his political/religious views.

Tell me String... Should Obama retire as well? Would you support people protesting HIS opposition to gay marriage six years ago? Is that Libertarian? To tell someone 'If you disagree with our group think, we can't work with you?'

What is your solution here? Do you want the government to silence the consumers and employees that were critical of his promotion to CEO?

No moron. They have every right to be critical and voice their opinions. But if the person did not bring their views into the work they were doing, then it should not be held against them. The company is who I find at fault here.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Ironically many liberals think libertarians are just bigoted and racist white men. I don't imagine String would have the same response if a CEO donated money to a Libertarian candidate and was forced out.

Which is why he refuses to answer. If the CEO had donated to planned parenthood and pro life workers did the same protest... I wonder what String would say.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Well, when fake libertarians and pretend supporters of free market principles argue that it implies a homosexual can be fired but demand "tolerance" when some rich white homophobe resigns is there any wonder why?

Again, you create bullshit straw men. Where did we say homosexuals can be fired? Oh yeah... nowhere.

You are still embellishing. We don't have any proof he was forced out.

No... you are just being an obtuse retard.

 

[Timshel]

LMAO... you are such a retard. It can only be forced or voluntary. Those are the only two options. Trying using a little common sense you moron.

No, it is not libertarian. It is group think. You are saying that others would find it hard to work with him because they don't agree with his political/religious views.

Tell me String... Should Obama retire as well? Would you support people protesting HIS opposition to gay marriage six years ago? Is that Libertarian? To tell someone 'If you disagree with our group think, we can't work with you?'

No moron. They have every right to be critical and voice their opinions. But if the person did not bring their views into the work they were doing, then it should not be held against them. The company is who I find at fault here.

Yeah, it can be forced or voluntary. And, you have no proof that it was forced or not voluntary. What is it you are having such a problem with, nitwit?

My position is totally libertarian. It's not group think dipshit, but market demand is typically expressed as an aggregate. Apparently, you want the government to step in here because you don't like the choices of the market. You don't have to agree with the political views of others but they and you can decide how they choose to respond.

I did not say he should resign so why would I argue that Obama should? You are desperately grasping at straws.

So you are suggesting that Mozilla should not be allowed to accept his resignation? What if he donated to ban interracial marriage?

Your solution is stupid and seems to be a cry for more government to protect the views of your partisan allies. My solution is the libertarian one.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yeah, it can be forced or voluntary. And, you have no proof that it was forced or not voluntary. What is it you are having such a problem with, nitwit?

Again moron... you are the ONLY one who doesn't think it was forced. Even other idiots are intelligent enough to see that he was forced out. Everything we know points to that being the case. You are simply being as obtuse as one can be.

My position is totally libertarian. It's not group think dipshit, but market demand is typically expressed as an aggregate. Apparently, you want the government to step in here because you don't like the choices of the market. You don't have to agree with the political views of others but they and you can decide how they choose to respond.

LMAO... ok Mr. Group think.

Try reading this...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...e-litmus-test-violates-liberal-values/360156/

 

[Bonestorm]

I didn't know that libertarians took exception to private parties each expressing their own frist amendment rights of speech and association. Interesting.

 

[Timshel]

Again, you create bullshit straw men. Where did we say homosexuals can be fired? Oh yeah... nowhere.



No... you are just being an obtuse retard.

Strawman. Where did I say he did say homosexuals can be fired? Nowhere.

Sorry about your butthurt, crybaby. But you don't have the proof to support your argument. It's quite possible he was forced out, but it's not an established fact nor is there even an accusation of it from those who might know, yet.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I didn't know that libertarians took exception to private parties each expressing their own frist amendment rights of speech and association. Interesting.

No libertarians do. Got another straw man?