Because people are trying to make a public statement, not change how the world fundmentally works. Once again it's the "If I can't stand up for everything, I shouldn't stand up for anything." argument and it's absurd because if everybody took that attitude nothing would ever change.
New Mozilla (Firefox) CEO Brendan Eich Donated To Anti-Gay Charity - Boycott Started!
- Thread starter Jasper
- Start date
- Status
Because people are trying to make a public statement, not change how the world fundmentally works. Once again it's the "If I can't stand up for everything, I shouldn't stand up for anything." argument and it's absurd because if everybody took that attitude nothing would ever change.
OrangeJulius
Member
He doesn't own the company he is a CEO, which is still an employee. Please answer my question personally. If I kicked your dog, would you hate me accountant who is by all accounts a perfectly nice animal lover?
StopMakingSense
Member
They get a share of the money for the traffic they direct to google through their search bar.
Who pays his salary that allows him to donate the money? And before you say but companies pay people money all the time to support unjust causes we are talking about making public statements not changing how everybody lives their lives.
If a company was actually using funds, I would agree with you. But I think boycotting an entire company based on the premise that an employee is indirectly funded by you purchasing a product is impractical.
Guess well just have to agree to disagree.
Chezzymann
Member
Not firefox in this case.
OrangeJulius
Member
So by that logic, if I donated money to the KKK, would you boycott my employer too since I get my paychecks from them?
What the actual fuck?
The Grim Heaper
Member
lol, boycott because someone used personal funds to fund something they believe it?
I'm not anti-gay, I actually support people to pursue their purpose in life and dreams, no matter what(unless it's illegal lol). But getting up in arms about things like this is really silly. I'm sticking with Mozilla Firefox.
I'm not anti-gay, I actually support people to pursue their purpose in life and dreams, no matter what(unless it's illegal lol). But getting up in arms about things like this is really silly. I'm sticking with Mozilla Firefox.
Why would you even come in this thread and make this argument?
It's not relevant if he did so with or without Mozilla money, people don't want homphobic guys to run a company like Mozilla and if he continues to be the CEO he will get Mozilla money in the future.
Personal money that he has made as an employee of Firefox which has made its money by having such a large number of users
Whats practical is making the statement about this particular issue. Just because someone that might boycott Firefox might not do the same for some other company is not the point. He has a view, he's entitled to it. He also leads a company that is very well known in the public domain. People don't always get to make that sttaement in a unified voice. If you're responsible enough to take the reigns of a company you're responsible enough to take responsibility for your actions. His actions are seen by some as reprehensible. Fair ot not, reprehensible actions taken by a leader have consenquences.
Okay, that's fair. I was MISSING this point being made, even though people were telling me this in their replies. It went over my head. So I appreciate you clarifying it a bit more.
SO yeah, I can't judge or fault anyone for not wanting to support a company because they take issue with the person that is running the company (on a personal level). As I said, it's totally up you, the consumer, to decide how to spend your money. If a CEO's personal life is reason to boycott the company, then so be it. We all have our reasons to support or not support a company/product.
See my reply above. I don't entirely agree with you on this stance. But I understand where you are coming from, and was missing that point.
Did you just not read the part where I said people are making a PUBLIC statement. If you're in the limelight and doing that would send a statement then yes, for those that want to make that statement.
So if I'm working in a conservative hotbed and someone found out I was pro gay rights, atheist/agnostic, donated to that cause in my own personal time, do not trumpet this cause during work, would it be alright for or me to take heat orhave my place of work pressured?
Im those things above, I don't know if I'd want my career judged on them.
Im those things above, I don't know if I'd want my career judged on them.
OrangeJulius
Member
Oh come off your high horse dude. He and Mozilla are completely separate in this. There is no discussion. He is a bigot donating his own money to bigoted causes. If I see evidence of Mozilla doing the same I will promptly switch browsers and never look back. Until then, it makes him a jack ass and Mozilla nothing more then his employer.
We obviously can't know what every employee is using their moneys on, but if someone as big as the CEO supports this kind of shit or if, say, a CEO hires bigoted people like himself because they share the same antiqued views, then yes, I would stop using your company's products/services/whatever. I don't buy Nestle products anymore because its CEO is a super-cunt who tries his best to trample human rights. This is exactly the same.
Hold on...
Boycott Mozilla because CEO donated money to Prop 8
Boycott Google because Mozilla gets their money from them
NeoGAF has Google Ads
Boycott NeoGAF?
NEVER
to stay consistent, I will continue using Firefox to browse NeoGAF and do Google searches
I even go to McDonalds sometimes even though I have a feeling a homophobe may work for them somewhere
Boycott Mozilla because CEO donated money to Prop 8
Boycott Google because Mozilla gets their money from them
NeoGAF has Google Ads
Boycott NeoGAF?
NEVER
to stay consistent, I will continue using Firefox to browse NeoGAF and do Google searches
I even go to McDonalds sometimes even though I have a feeling a homophobe may work for them somewhere
You get off your high horse because you're the one who seems to think nobody should make a stand if you deem it unfair.
Agreed on all fronts. I'm going to draw the line there as well. Let me know when Mozilla uses it's own money and I will uninstall Firefox immediately.
In the meantime I'm totally ok with this guy getting ran through the filter of public option for his bigoted positions.
I'm also not going to judge anyone for deciding to boycott a product either. My rule #1 of the internet is to not get worked up over other people getting worked up, if that makes sense.
OrangeJulius
Member
I don't know what else to say then other then to say I think your anger and protests are misplaced. I could understand not buying products that are tested on animals, or made in factories by 8 year old kids. But this is not that situation. What that CEO does on his OWN time with his OWN dollars will not effect me using a product by the corporation he presides over that has shown no evidence of supporting his anti gay agenda.
I think those are some pretty big assumptions. I think a better argument is that, any company that is okay with a bigot being the head of their company, is someone that doesn't deserve my support. Which I can understand. As others have posted below, a CEO reflects the image of their company.
Tabasco
Member
I would use Chrome but I don't like being tracked by Google.
OrangeJulius
Member
I apologize for the high horse remark, that crossed a line and I'm sorry. I'm all for making stands, it has nothing to do with fair or unfair. I simply think yours is not logical. I don't see the logic in boycotting a company or product for the unrelated actions of one of it's employees. And yes a CEO is still an employee, maybe a high ranking and public one, but an employee nonetheless.
We just have to agree to disagree.
I never even took a postition. I'm just saying why people are doing it. When you are the CEO of a company, your actions at least partially reflect that company so in that sense no he's not just another employee IMO. I think the logic is it stops others in positions of power from doing the same thing next time. Which is a win even if it's a small one.
OrangeJulius
Member
It's a win, except you are boycotting an entire company and hence suddenly taking income away from the everyday workers in Mozilla.
It's ridiculous to make an entire company and it's workers suffer for the actions of one dipshit. If everyone does as you ask and boycotts Mozilla and the company goes under tomorrow how will you feel about all the laborers and software engineers that are now unemployed?
CurlySaysX
Banned
I am outraged.
I find it interesting that you are drawing this scenario, but let me say this:
If this would happen, they would drop any CEO for whatever reason very fast for the sake of the company, he could be the perfect saint, be certain of that!
Then he'll have to step down before that happens, won't he. If the voices get loud enough, the company has no choice. Chick-fil-A had to back down and I'm not aware of any major layoffs in that organization. I know the situations are different in the way the money was transfered but the battle is the same.
OrangeJulius
Member
If people really want to protest this, then write letters to Mozillas board of directors demanding that the CEO be removed.
Boycotting the company is irresponsible and doesn't take into account the innocent employees who have nothing whatsoever to do with any of this mess.
It reeks of faux internet outrage because people just want to be mad about something and see someone burn for it, no matter who get's caught in the crossfire.
Being a private company the board of directors won't feel shareholder pressure to send the CEO packing. As I said, a boycott hurts EVERYBODY at Mozilla. Spam angry letters to the BOD if you want him out. Don't make others lose jobs because of the actions of one man
Maybe that's what it reeks of to you but some people are very genuine in their beliefs. Do some get upset for the sake of being upset? Sure, but that doesn't invalidate that this is not acceptable to some people. The boycott is meant to scare them a lot faster than a letter writing campaign would, For the record though, I think letter writing is a perfectly fine way to express your disatisfaction if that's what you comfortable with. I' not saying everybody MUST boycott Firefox or that means they agree with this man. I'm saying I completely understand why some might.
The scenario of other people loosing their jobs over this isn't even worth debating in my opinion.
People altogether don't care enough, quite possibly, the outrage surrounding this gets Mozilla some new users because they get media coverage.
Wow.
Gentleman Jack
Member
It was both. Do you believe that anti-gay marriage and anti-gay are mutually exclusive characteristics?
whatever helps you sleep at night, i guess
OrangeJulius
Member
Even the threat of that action is still short sighted and cold blooded. Of course I realize it won't happen on that scale. But the fact that people would even threaten boycott is pretty over reactionary. If it DID gain traction to the point that people (everyday employees) lost their jobs, I know personally that I would feel absolutely horrible for having supported it.
The ire needs to be pointed at the man, not the corporation he heads. Don't cut off the leg because you got a splinter in your foot.
Mercury Fred
Banned
Weird, off analogy.
I don't know, were separate drinking fountains and denial of services to African Americans racist or just separate?
CornBurrito
Member
Are you of the call it something else sort?
OrangeJulius
Member
I'm not sure how. Your blaming a company and all of it's employees, including janitors, code engineers, security guards, you name it, all of them, for the actions of one of their employees.
All for something that employee did on his own time, with his own money, with no knowledge or consent from Mozilla.
Can you explain how my analogy is off instead of using a drive by reply? My analogy has you blaming one of my employees for the actions of their boss. I kicked your dog, not my accountant, so are you going to boycott my accountant?
Earthstrike
Member
A widespread boycott of Firefox would have an impact in that it would provide an incentive to have ceos who have progressive views. So there is a real impact.
As for "picking your battles", that saying usually implies you should pick battles overzealously. People are at very little of a personal loss switching from firefox to chrome, opera, or IE.
CyclopsRock
Member
People here keep saying "hate group" but the article doesn't make it clear what he actually donated to. I don't think one has to hate gay people to oppose gay marriage.
I wouldn't care less what the CEO of Firefox believes in. I'll still use Firefox as long as I find it useful.
Steve Jobs was total a jerk - that didn't stop me from buying Macs. I don't like Dana White, I don't agree with anything he says and don't like how he treats fighters - that doesn't stop me from watching the UFC.
I wonder what kind of world we live nowadays, where everyone has to be 100% perfect and believe in the same things as us, or else!
Steve Jobs was total a jerk - that didn't stop me from buying Macs. I don't like Dana White, I don't agree with anything he says and don't like how he treats fighters - that doesn't stop me from watching the UFC.
I wonder what kind of world we live nowadays, where everyone has to be 100% perfect and believe in the same things as us, or else!
Mercury Fred
Banned
CEO of a corporation ≠ someone's personal accountant
They may not "hate" them (or at least admit that they do) but they desire to denigrate and deny gay people basic rights. Close enough.
OrangeJulius
Member
How so? And how does it make my analogy off? Ultimately you are punishing others for the actions of an unrelated party.
Both scenarios describe that, meaning they are properly analogous.
I understand that you get really worked up over these issues, I've been reading GAF a long time and rightfully so you should get worked up. But even you have to admit that you are punishing multiple people for the actions of one unrelated man.
Can you explain to me why you think it's acceptable to harm others to exact vengeance on one man? Because that's what a mass boycott of Mozilla will do. People could lose their jobs. Families could go hungry, lose houses, cars etc. Of course this would require basically everyone on the planet to boycott Mozilla and isn't likely, but still. The intentions are there and that's pretty bad. I'm sorry but I feel like you and anyone else who supports this are bad people.
Support gay rights, support human rights in general, but don't do it at the expense of another innocent and unrelated person, otherwise you are no better than the people fostering hate. Bystanders don't need to go down in order to take out the target.
- Status