Today I contacted three people that I had in the past convinced to switch from 
IE or Chrome to FF. I persuaded them to uninstall FF because of your culture of 
politically correct bigotry. After reading this list today, I think I'll keep 
doing that as a hobby. Why? Because after the politically correct witch hunt 
that resulted in Eich being out and radical gays being appeased, all I see here 
are what come across as smug attempts to deflect blame and just weather the 
storm. FF is the new IE, the boorish clod that wants to just dissemble or stomp 
over any opposition in the style of Gates.

Yes, I've seen the aggravatingly repetitive "Eich wasn't forced out, he quit" 
replies which only come across as being deliberately misleading. The fact will 
always remain that he is gone because radical gays wanted him gone over his 
personal beliefs.

There is also the disingenuous refusal to acknowledge that we live in a era of 
politically correct witch hunts, which is why people are finally fed up. This 
episode did not occur in a vacuum. Mozilla is Cracker Barrel part 2.

There are the ever present double-standards of political correctness, such as 
the calls in the moderation thread that any opposition to gay marriage should 
be censored from this list. But in another thread, any employees who called for 
Eich's purging should not suffer any negative consequences, because that is 
presumably the good kind of intolerance on their part.

Then we have the claims that Mozilla statements didn't mean what they said. The 
chairwomans' statement that everyone reasonably interprets as "we're so eagerly 
sorry that we didn't purge the intolerant bigot sooner" didn't really mean that 
after all. Sure, sure... Since the tidal wave of negative backlash, she makes 
no statement wanting to communicate on that, much less apologize on that part 
of the 'community', does she? That makes her original meaning doubly clear.


Some particular examples:

Here's a statement that merges two very wrong approaches: "On the one hand, 
someone from Engagement should talk to the petitioners and explain that we did 
not fire Brendan or coerce him to resign. On the other hand, if it's not really 
affecting usage, is it worth it?  -Sheeri Cabral" So much for being principled, 
huh? It's just a matter of what Mozilla can get away with after all.

Or this:
"If I understand correctly what you write, you are changing browser
because 4 employees of Mozilla have asked for the resignation of
Brendan? Or am I misunderstanding?

Best regards,
 David "

which comes across as condescendingly mocking.

Then there are the inevitable "let's move on" exhortations because Mozilla is 
the supposed great repository of fairness and equality and tolerance of diverse 
speech. That's entirely laughable, considering that the CEO was just purged to 
appease radical gays. (Sure, sure... he "volunteered to be purged!")

But wait, Eich was also encouraged to accept a humiliating demotion, so that 
makes everything all right. Then there's the outright falsehood that he's still 
an active part of Mozilla.

Through it all, while many, many thousands (and growing) are infuriated over 
what happened, not one person from Mozilla is. Not from the top to the bottom, 
none that have overtly said so anyway. Quite a disconnect.

So keep fiddlling, Mozilla. People are coming to believe that you are even less 
trustworthy than the deceptive spies of megacorporation google. You are making 
enemies and enemies have a way of multiplying. That's the same maxim that 
Micro$oft arrogantly ignored all those years ago.
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to