On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 10:11:01 AM UTC-5, Michael Connor wrote: > > Leaving aside the reality that no employer can force an employee to remain an > employee, how can a board, in good conscience, refuse to allow an individual > to step out of the line of fire? The situation was escalating, and there was > an immense amount of strain on Brendan, largely due to a massive amount of > direct abuse and harassment. > > > > As a bit of perspective, I've lived through a similar situation or two, on a > much smaller scale, and those are among the worst points in my life. I can't > imagine how hard it was on Brendan as a human being. I can't blame him for > wanting a clean break. > > > > -- Mike
The board, as a symbolic gesture of unity and confidence in its original decision to appoint him could have made a public announcement that it continued to have confidence in him and was holding his resignation in abeyance or flat out rejecting it. The Board then steps into the line of fire to help protect him, as best possible from the abuse and harassment. Mr. Eich, of course, as are all of us, is then free to continue or not as he sees fit. A resolution rejecting a resignation of a high level executive is always a symbolic gesture of support, saying we do not feel you need to do this and we are behind you. As has been clearly demonstrated, it is a matter of appearance, primarily, and now Mozilla finds itself in a very unpleasant situation whereby they have alienated nearly everyone. And most worrisome, is the potential repercussions of this go far beyond Firefox and Mozilla or the groups pro or con, and go to the meat of what we are and are to become as a society. _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
